Education

Education

1. Jewish.-The Jews from early times prized education in a measure beyond the nations around them. It was the key to the knowledge of their written Law, the observance of which was required by the whole people without respect of rank or class. They were the people of a Book, and wherever there is a written literature, and that religiously binding, elementary education, at least in the forms of reading and writing, is imperative and indispensable. The rise of the synagogue, and of the order of Scribes in connexion therewith, exercised a powerful influence upon the progress of education among the mass of the people. In the 4th cent. b.c. there was a synagogue in every town, and in the 2nd cent. in every considerable village as well. To the synagogues there were in all probability attached schools, both elementary and higher, and the azzn (the attendant, Luk 4:20 Revised Version ) may well have been the teacher. The value of education was understood among the Jews before the Christian era. In the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs we read: Do ye also teach your children letters, that they may have understanding all their life, reading unceasingly the Law of God (Levi, xiii. 2). In the Psalms of Solomon the frequent use of , , and (with the significant addition of , 7:8, and of , 18:8) points to the existence of schools and of a professional class of teachers. By the Apostolic Age there is abundant evidence of the general diffusion of education among the people. Our principal care of all, says Josephus (c. Ap. i. 12), comparing the Jews with other nations, is to educate our children well, and to observe the laws, and we think it to be the most necessary business of our whole life to keep this religion which has been handed down to us. Among the Jews every child had to learn to read; scarcely any Jewish children were to be found to whom reading of a written document was strange, and therefore were there so many poor Jewish parents ready to deny themselves the necessaries of life in order to let their children have instruction (c. Ap. ii. 26; cf. B. Strassburger, Gesch. der Erziehung bei den Israeliten, 1885, p. 7). The result of instruction from the earliest years in the home, and of teaching received on the Sabbath, and on the frequent occasions of national festivals, is, according to the Jewish historian, that if anybody do but ask any one of our people about our laws, he could more easily tell them all than he could tell his own name. For because of ear having learned them as soon as ever we became sensible of anything, we have them as it were engraven on our souls (c. Ap. ii. 19).

Education began, as Josephus says, with the earliest infancy. Philo speaks of Jewish youth being taught, so to speak, from their very swaddling clothes by parents and teachers and inspectors, even before they receive instruction in the holy laws and unwritten customs of their religion, to believe in God the one Father and Creator of the world (Legat. ad Gaium, 16). From a babe thou hast known the sacred writings, writes St. Paul to Timothy (2Ti 3:15), recalling his disciples early acquaintance with the OT Scriptures. At the age of six the Jewish boy would go to the elementary school (Bth ha-Spher), but before this he would have received lessons in Scripture from his parents and have learned the Shma and the Halll, From the sixth to the tenth year he would make a study of the Law, along with writing and arithmetic. At the age of ten he would be admitted to the higher school (Bth ha-Midrsh), where he would make the acquaintance of the oral Law, beginning with the Mishna, repetition, the oral traditions of the Law. At the age of thirteen he would be acknowledged by a sort of rite of confirmation as a Son of the Commandment (Bar-mivh), and from this point his further studies would depend upon the career he was to follow in life. If he was to become a Rabbi, he would continue his studies in the Law, and, as Saul of Tarsus did, betake himself to some famous teacher and sit at his feet as a disciple.

Although schools were thus in existence in connexion with the synagogues, it was not till comparatively late that schools, in the modern sense, for the education of children by themselves, seem to have been instituted (see article Education in Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible (5 vols) ). They are said to have been first established by Simon bn-Shetach in the 1st cent. b.c., but this is disputed. However this may be, schools were placed upon a satisfactory and permanent footing by Joshua bn-Gamaliel, who is said to have been high priest from a.d. 63 to 65, and who ordained that teachers of youth should be placed in every town and every village, and that children on arriving at school age should be sent to them for instruction. Of him it is said that if he had not lived, the Law would have perished from Israel. The love of sacred learning and the study of the Law in synagogue and school saved the Jewish people from extinction. When Jerusalem had been destroyed and the Jewish population had been scattered after the disastrous events of a.d. 70, the school accompanied the people into the lands of their dispersion. Jamnia, between Joppa and Ashdod, then became the headquarters of Jewish learning, and retained the position till the unhappy close of Bar Cochbas rebellion. The learned circle then moved northwards to Galilee, and Tiberias and Sepphoris became seats of Rabbinical training. Wherever the Jews were settled, the family gathering of the Passover, the household instruction as to its origin and history, and the training in the knowledge of the Law, served to knit them together and to intensify their national feeling even in the midst of heathen surroundings.

While the great subject of school instruction was the Law, the work of the elementary school embraced reading, writing, and arithmetic. To make the Jewish boy familiar with the Hebrew characters in every jot and tittle, and to make him able to produce them himself, was the business of the Bth ha-Spher, the House of the Book. Reading thus came to be a universal accomplishment among the Jewish people, and it was a necessary qualification where the sacred books were not the exclusive concern of a priestly caste, but were meant to be read and studied in the home as well as read aloud and expounded in the synagogue. The case of Timothy already referred to is evidence of this; and the Scriptures which the Jewish converts of Bera examined daily were no doubt the OT in Greek which they were trained to study for themselves. Writing may not have been so general an accomplishment, but it must also have been in considerable demand. This can be inferred from the numerous copies of the Scripture books which had to be produced; and from the prevalence of tphilln (phylacteries) and mzzth, little metal cases containing the Shma, the name of God, and texts of Scripture, fastened to the doorposts of Jewish houses, which were in use before the Apostolic Age. The simple rules of arithmetic would be wanted to calculate the weeks, months, and festivals of the Jewish year.

In the higher school, Bth ha-Midrsh, the House of Study, the contents of the Law and the Books of Scripture as a whole were expounded by the authorities. It is said to have been a rule of the Jewish schools not to allow all and sundry, without regard to age, to read all the books of Holy Scripture, but to give to the young all those portions of Scripture whose literal sense commanded universal acceptance, and only after they had attained the age of twenty-five to allow them to read the whole. Origen lefts of the scruples of the Jewish teachers in regard to the reading of the Song of Solomon by the young (Harnack, Bible Reading in the Early Church, 1912, p. 30f.). But there was no lack of materials for reading and exposition. In course of time there grew up the great and varied literature now contained in the Talmud-the Mishna, the Gemara, and the Midrshic literature of all sorts-narrative, illustrative, proverbial, parabolic, and allegorical (see I. Abrahams, Short History of Jewish Literature, 1906, ch. iv.; Oesterley and Box, Religion and Worship of the Synagogue2, 1911, ch. v.).

In the school the children sat on the floor in a circle round the teacher, who occupied a chair or bench (Luk 2:46; Luk 10:39, Act 22:3). The method of instruction was oral and catechetical. In the schools attached to the synagogues of Eastern Judaism to this day, committing to memory and learning by rote are the chief methods of instruction, and the clamour of infant and youthful voices is heard repeating verses and passages of Scripture the whole school day. This kind of oral repetition and committing to memory undoubtedly occupied a large place in the earliest Christian teaching, and had an important influence in the composition of the gospel narratives. The purpose of St. Luke in writing his Gospel was that Theophilus might know more fully the certainty of the things concerning Jesus wherein he had been instructed () (Luk 1:4). Apollos having been thus instructed in the way or the Lord (Act 18:25) taught with accuracy the facts concerning Jesus. But whilst the method had great advantages, it had also great dangers, tending to crush out all originality and life, and to result in barren formalism.

In the education of the Jewish boy, punishment, we may be sure, was not withheld. The directions of the Book of Proverbs, which is itself a treasury of sound educational principles, were carried out not only in the home but in the school (Pro 12:24; Pro 19:18; Pro 23:13). St. Paul, addressing a self-righteous Jew, exposes the inconsistency of the man who professes to be a guide of the blind ( ), a corrector of the foolish ( ), and a teacher of infants ( ), and yet does not know the inwardness of the Law (Rom 2:19 f.).

Games had some part in the life of Jewish schoolboys. One game consisted in imitating their elders at marriages and funerals (Mat 11:16 f.). Riddles and guesses seem to have been common, and story-telling, music, and song were not wanting. But when, under the influence of Antiochus Epiphanes, a gymnasion for the athletic performances of the Greeks was set up in Jerusalem and the youth of the city were required to strip themselves of their clothing, it became a grievous cause of offence to the pious among the people (1Ma 1:11 ff.). See art Games in Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible (5 vols) .

Whilst the education of Jewish youth on the theoretical side centred in the Law and was calculated to instil piety towards God, no instruction was complete without the knowledge of some trade or handicraft. To circumcise him, to teach him the Law, to give him a trade, were the primary obligations of a father towards his son. He that teacheth not his son a trade doeth the same as if he taught him to be a thief, is a Jewish saying. Jesus Himself was the carpenter (Mar 6:3), and Saul of Tarsus, the scholar of Gamaliel, was a tent-maker (Act 18:3). We hear of Rabbis who were needle-makers, tanners, and followed other occupations, and who, like St. Paul, made it their boast that their own hands ministered to their necessities and to them that accompanied them (Act 20:34).

The education of the Jewish youth began at home, and the parents were the first instructors. Of a noted teacher of the 2nd cent. a.d. it was said that he never broke his fast until he had first given a lesson to his son. But in due course the children were sent to school, in Rabbinic times apparently under the protection of a pdagogue, better known, however, in Greek family life (Gal 3:24). The teacher was required to be a man of unblemished character, of gentle and patient disposition, with aptness to teach. Only married men could be employed as teachers. Women and unmarried men were excluded from the office. The office itself was full of honour: A city which neglects to appoint teachers ought to be destroyed, runs the saying. One teacher was to be employed where there were 25 scholars (with an assistant where the number exceeded 25), and two where they exceeded 40. In the 2nd and 3rd centuries of the Christian era teachers received salaries, but the remuneration was in respect of the more technical part of the instruction. Nothing was to be charged for the Midrsh, the exposition of Scripture.

The girls in Jewish families were not by any means left without instruction. The women of the household, like Eunice, the mother, and Lois, the grandmother, of Timothy (2Ti 1:5), who at least influenced the boys, would have a more active part in the instruction of the girls. This means that they were not themselves left without education. The example of Priscilla, the wife of Aquila, shows that a Jewess (who did not owe all her training to Christianity) might be possessed of high gifts and attainments (Act 18:26). In the Talmud similar instances of gifted and accomplished women are to be found. One of the most notable features in what is known as the Reform movement in modern Judaism is the earnestness with which its adherents insist upon the mere general and the higher education of women.

Literature.-Relevant articles in J. Hamburger, Real-Encyclopdie fr Bibel und Talmud2, 1884ff. S. S. Laurie, Hist. Survey of pre-Christian Education, 1895; The Semitic Races; A. Bchler, The Economic Conditions of Juda after the Destruction of the Second Temple, 1912 article Education (Jewish) by Morris Joseph in Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics v. [1912] 194, and Literature there cited.

2. Greek.-Among the Greeks education was the affair of the State. Its purpose was to prepare the sons of free citizens for the duties awaiting them, first in the family and then in the State. Whilst among the Jews education was meant for all, without respect of rank or class, among the Greeks it was intended for the few-the wealthy and the well-born. Plutarch in his treatise on the education of children says: Some one may object that I in undertaking to give prescriptions in the training of children of free citizens apparently neglect the training of the poor townsmen, and only think of instructing the rich-to which the obvious answer is that I should desire the training I prescribe to be attainable alike by all; but if any through want of private means cannot attain it, let them blame their fortune and not their adviser. Every effort, however, must be made even by the poor to train their children in the best possible way, and if this is beyond them to do it according to their means [de Lib. Educ. ii.). Down to the Roman period at least, this educational exclusiveness was maintained, and only the sons of those who were full citizens were the subjects of education, although there were cases in which daughters rose to distinction in letters, and even examples of slaves, like the philosopher Epictetus, who burst the restraints of their position and showed themselves capable of rising to eminence in learning and virtue. We even read of bequests being made to provide free education to children of both sexes, but the rule was that women needed no more instruction than they were likely to receive at home. Being an affair of the State, education was under the control of officials appointed to superintend it. Gymnastic, for the training of the body, and music in the larger sense, including letters, for the training of the mind, were the subjects of instruction. These-athletics, literature, music-were regulated by a body of guardians of public instruction (.) We hear of an Ephebarch at the head of a college of , or youths who have entered the higher school, and of a Gymnasiarch who superintends the exercises of the and pays the training-masters.

The stages of education were practically the same in all the different branches of the wide-spread Grecian people. First, there was the stage of home education, extending from birth to the end of the seventh year, when the children were under parental supervision; second, the stage of school education, beginning with the eighth year and lasting to the sixteenth or eighteenth year; thirdly, there was the stage from the sixteenth or eighteenth to the twenty-first year, when the youths were , and were subjected to strict discipline and training. Before a youth was enrolled among the he had to undergo an examination () to make sure that he was the son of an Athenian citizen and that he had the physique for the duties now devolving upon him. This was really the university stage of his career, for he then attended the class of the rhetors and sophists who lectured in such institutions as the Lyceum and the Academy, and devoted himself to the study of rhetoric and philosophy (cf. Act 19:9). On the completion of this course he was ready to enter upon the exercise of his duties towards the State.

When the boy, at the age of seven, went to school-the grammar school and the gymnastic school-he was accompanied by a servant called a who carried his books and writing materials, his lyre and other instruments, and saw him to school and back (see Schoolmaster, Tutor). The school-rooms of ancient Athens seem to have been simple enough, containing little or no furniture-they were often nothing but porches open to wind and sun, where the children sat on the ground, or on low benches, and the teacher on a high chair. At first the child would be exercised in the rudiments, (cf. Col 2:8 and Xen. Mem. II. i. 1). Great stress was laid upon reading, recitation, and singing. In particular, the memory was exercised upon the best literature, and cultivated to an extraordinary degree of retentiveness. The works of aesop and Theognis were much in use in the class-rooms. Homer was valued not merely as a poet but as an inspired moral teacher, and the Iliad and Odyssey were the Bible of the Greeks. Great pains were also taken with the art of writing. Tablets covered with wax formed the material to receive the writing, and the stylus was employed to trace the letters. By apostolic times papyrus or parchment was in use, written upon with pen () and ink () (2Jn 1:12, 3Jn 1:13; cf. 2Co 3:3 and 2Ti 4:13). Sherds () were a common writing material-that used by the very poor in ancient Egypt. Exercises in writing and in grammar have been preserved to us in the soil of Egypt written on ostraca, on wooden tablets, on tablets smeared over with wax, and have now been recovered to let us see the performances of the school children of twenty centuries ago. Among them are school copies giving the letters of the alphabet, Syllables, common words and proper names, conjugation of verbs, pithy or proverbial sayings as headlines, and there are even exercises having the appearance of being school punishments (E. Ziebarth, Aus der antiken Schule, 1910, in Lietzmanns Kleine Texte).

The mention of school punishments leads to the subject of school discipline. At home, at school, and in the palaestra, the rod and the lash were freely used. It is from school life, both Jewish and Greek, that St. Paul, as noted already, derives the imagery of a well-known passage in his Epistles (Rom 2:17-21). In the Psalms of Solomon, a Jewish book written under Greek influence, there is reference both to the rod (, 7:8) and to the lash (, 18:8) as instruments of punishment; and chastening, correction (), occurs again and again in this sense (Eph 6:4, 2Ti 3:16, Heb 12:11; cf. Didache, 4).

We are given over to grammar, says Sextus Empiricus (adv. Math. i. 41), from childhood, and almost from our baby-clothes. Grammar was succeeded by rhetoric, which had accomplished its purpose when the student had acquired the power of speaking offhand on any subject under discussion. In addition to these subjects, philosophy was also taught, its technical terms being mastered and its various schools discriminated. Arithmetic, geometry, astronomy belonged to the programme of secondary education, and from Plato and Aristotle there have come down to us the seven liberal arts-the trivium and the quadrivium of the Middle Ages. All the while gymnastic training went hand in hand with the training of the intellect. The gymnasion, where the youths of Greece exercised themselves naked, was enclosed by walls and fitted up with dressing-rooms, bath-rooms, and requisites for running, leaping, wrestling, boxing, and other athletic exercises, and there were seats round about the course for spectators, and porticoes where philosophers gathered.

By the Apostolic Age it had become the practice for promising students to supplement their school education by seeking out and attending the lectures of eminent teachers in what we should call the great universities. Roman Emperors like Claudius and Nero had done much to encourage Greek culture and to introduce it into Rome itself, where the Athenaeum was a great centre of learning. At this epoch Athens and Rome had famous schools, but even they had to yield to Rhodes, Alexandria, and Tarsus; and Marseilles, which had been from the very early days of Greek history a centre of Greek influence, was in the time of Strabo more frequented than Athens. The idea that Barnabas of Cyprus and Saul of Tarsus had met in early life at the university of Tarsus is by no means fanciful, and it was to his education at Tarsus that St. Paul owed the power to move in Hellenic Society at his ease (W. M. Ramsay, Pictures of the Apostolic Church, 1910, p. 346). That St. Luke had received a medical education and was familiar with the great medical writers of the Greek world is now almost universally admitted; his literary style and the frequent echoes of Greek authors, at least in the Acts of the Apostles, prove him to have been a well-educated and cultured Hellenist. Of the various philosophic schools then exercising an influence upon thought in the Greek world two are expressly mentioned in the Acts (17:18)-the Stoics and the Epicureans. St. Paul must have received Stoic teaching at Tarsus, where the school flourished, and he knew and quoted at least one Stoic poet (Act 17:28). A century later Marcus Aurelius endowed the four great philosophical schools of Athens-the Academic, the Peripatetic, the Epicurean, and the Stoic. Justin Martyr, a little earlier, in the account he gives of his conversion to Christianity (Dial. cum Tryph. 2ff.), shows how the representatives of the Stoic, the Peripatetic, the Pythagorean, and the Academic (Platonic) Schools in turn failed to satisfy his yearning after truth, and satisfaction came to him when he found Christianity to be the only philosophy sure and suited to the needs of man. Christianity, brought into contact with the society in which this philosophical habit of mind had established itself, modified, stimulated, and elevated it, and in turn was modified by the habit of mind of those who accepted it. It was impossible for Greeks, educated as they were with an education which penetrated their whole nature, to receive or to retain Christianity in its primitive simplicity. Their own life had become complex and artificial: it had its fixed ideas and its permanent categories: it necessarily gave to Christianity something of its own form (E. Hatch, Influence of Greek Ideas and Usages upon the Christian Church [Hibbert Lectures, 1888], 1890, ch. ii. p. 48f.).

Literature.-T. Davidson, Aristotle (in Great Educators), 1892; S. S. Laurie, Hist. Survey of Pre-Christian Education, 1895: The Hellenic Race; J. P. Mahaffy, The Greek World under Roman Sway, 1890; article Education (Greek) by W. Murison in Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics v. 185 and Literature there cited.

3. Christian.-The sentiment which caused education to be so prized among the Jews must in course of time have caused it to be greatly desired among the followers of Christ. To the first Christians, as to the Lord and His apostles, the OT Scriptures were the Bible, and, outside the Holy Land at least, the Bible in the Septuagint translation. No doubt it was a roll of this translation which the Ethiopian eunuch was carrying back with him to his home far up the Nile, when Philip the Evangelist joined him in his chariot on the Gaza road (Act 8:27 ff.). It was the same Scriptures wherein the youthful Timothy was instructed from infancy in the home of his Greek father, under the guidance of Eunice and Lois (2Ti 3:15). St. Paul, in the many quotations he makes from the OT, quotes from the Septuagint rather than from the Hebrew original. The Septuagint was to him as much the Bible as our English version is to us; and, as is the case with many Christian writers, he knew it so well that his sentences are constantly moulded by its rhythm, and his thoughts incessantly coloured by its expressions (Farrar, St. Paul, 1879, i. 47). It was not till the second half of the 2nd cent. that most of the NT books were recognized in the Church as the Oracles of God, and on the same level of authority as the books of the OT. Among the Jewish Christians, as Harnack points out, the private use of the Holy Scriptures simply continued; for the fact that they had become believers in the Messiahship of Jesus had absolutely no other effect than to increase this use, in so far as it was now necessary to study not only the Law but also the Prophets and the Kethubim, seeing that these afforded prophetic proofs of the Messiah-ship of Jesus, and in so far as the religious independence of the individual Christian was still greater than that of the ordinary Jew (Bible Reading in the Early Church, p. 32).

That the private study which had been devoted to the OT came in due course to be given to the books of the NT may be seen from the use of them in the writings of the Apostolic Fathers. The OT, the Gospels, and the Epistles of St. Paul had a wide circulation at an early period, in all the provinces of the early Church, and were perused and applied to their spiritual needs by multitudes of Christians, not clerical only, but lay; not men only, but women. Ye know the Holy Scriptures, writes Clement of Rome to the Corinthian Christians (1 Clem. liii. 1), Yea, your knowledge is laudable, and ye have deep insight into the Oracles of God. What are these articles in your hand bag? asks the proconsul Saturninus when examining Speratus, one of the band of Scillitan martyrs in N. Africa. The books and epistles of St. Paul, was the reply (Texts and Studies i. 2 [1891], p. 114). The feeling grew and spread that it was at once a privilege and a duty thus to make acquaintance with the meaning and teaching of Holy Scripture. In Asia Minor and in Gaul, in Syria and Egypt, this feeling prevailed. Men like Justin Martyr, Tatian, Theophilus of Antioch, became Christians-such is their own acknowledgment-by reading the Scriptures for themselves. By and by wealthy Christians had Bibles copied at their own expense to be given or lent to their poorer brethren. Pamphilus, the friend of Eusebius, whose library at Caesarea was famous, had Bibles copied to keep in stock and to be given away as occasion demanded, not only to men but also to women whom he saw devoted to the reading of Scripture (Jerome, Apol. c. Rufin. i. 9).

All this intellectual activity devoted to the study of the Scriptures implies throughout the early Church a considerable level of educational attainment. That many of the poorest and least educated found in Christ and His teaching the satisfaction of their deepest needs is manifest from the NT itself (1Co 1:26 ff.), and Celsus sought to discredit the Christian system by aspersing the intellectual as well as the moral character of its adherents. Origen in answer points to the passages of the OT, especially in the Psalms, which the Christians also use, which inculcate wisdom and understanding, and declares that education, so far from being despised among the Christians, is the pathway to virtue and knowledge, the one stable and permanent reality (c. Cels. iii. 49, 72). We must not suppose, however, that the Church of the first days took any steps to provide schools and an educational system of her own. Members of the Christian community had no alternative but to send their sons to the schools of their localities to receive instruction along with scholars who were heathen and accustomed to the usages and customs, the superstitions and fables, often corrupt and unclean, of paganism. Although the Fathers of the Church did not permit their youth to become instructors in pagan schools, they did not consider it wise to deny them the advantages of a liberal education, even though associated with falsehood and idolatry. If they had forbidden their attendance they would have justly incurred the charges made by Celsus of hostility to learning. Christian parents made a virtue of necessity, which Tertullian approves, only recommending Christian pupils to accept the good and reject the bad (de Idolatria, x.).

Scarcely less pressing and even more difficult was the question of the propriety of studying the productions of the great pagan writers. Among those who took the liberal view was Justin Martyr, who held that those who lived with Logos are Christians, even if they were accounted atheists: of whom among Greeks were Socrates and Heraclitus (Apol. i. 46). Clement of Alexandria was conspicuously broad in his Christian sympathies, and his quotations from classical writers have preserved to us fragments of authors whose works have otherwise perished. Others, like Cyprian, drew a sharp dividing line between pagan philosophy and Christian doctrine.

But though the circumstances of the times rendered separate Christian elementary instruction impossible and inadvisable in the early Church, the Church was not indifferent to the Christian instruction of her members. Foremost among the members belonging to the Body of Christ are teachers, mentioned along with apostles and prophets (1Co 12:28). Elsewhere they are classed with pastors (Eph 4:11). Among the gifts that minister to the upbuilding of the social fabric of Christianity is teaching (Rom 12:7). Power to teach was a qualification which Timothy was charged to look for in the bishops whom he should appoint (1Ti 3:2), and he was told that the servant of the Lord in any office must have aptness to teach (2Ti 2:24). The teacher as a separate functionary seems early to have disappeared from the Church, his functions being absorbed by the more official presbyter or bishop (q.v. [Note: quod vide, which see.] ), who was always required to be able to teach (Charteris, The Church of Christ, p. 32). The need, however, for institutions for higher instruction in the things of Christ came to be felt early, Out of the training of the candidates for baptism grew the catechetical schools in great centres of pagan learning. The first and most notable of them was the catechetical school of Alexandria, of which Pantaenus was the founder, and Clement and Origen were the most distinguished ornaments. This was the counterpart of the pagan university, offering to philosophic pagans an academic and articulated view of the Christian system, and to earnest Christians of intellectual gifts and tastes training for the offices of preachers and teachers. Gregory Thaumaturgus commends Origen as having taught him philosophy, logic, mathematics, general literature, and ethics as the ground-work of theological training, after which he proceeded to the exposition of the sacred Scriptures. Under Clement and Origen the school was great and prosperous, and schools at Caesarea, Jerusalem, and elsewhere were founded upon its model.

The share which woman had in the work of Christian education apart from her influence and work in the home is not made clear in the records of Church history. In the Syriac Didascalia Apostolorum, however, translated by Mrs. M. D. Gibson (1903), we have an official document of the 3rd cent. directing the deaconesses to assist in the baptism of women, to teach and educate them afterwards, and to visit and nurse the sick.

Literature.-A. Harnack, Bible Reading in the Early Church, 1912; A. H. Charteris, The Church of Christ, 1905, under Education and Teachers; P. Monroe, Text-Book in the History of Education, 1905; article Bible in the Church by E. von Dobschtz in Encyclopaedia of Religion and Ethics ii. 579.

Thomas Nicol.

Fuente: Dictionary of the Apostolic Church

education

Consists in developing intelligence, acquiring knowledge, and forming character. This is done by the three agencies most competent to do it, the home, the school, and the Church. Its object is to train the child or immature mind for life here and hereafter, for the destiny allotted to each, and for the relations which each one has to God, to the neighbor, and to the world at large. Literature, art, science, and moral, social, and religious principle are the means of this training, and no education is complete without some knowledge and practise in all of them. Practise is the special element which Christianity introduced in education. Besides a new conception of life, and new sources of knowledge, it brought new principles of action and inculcated the necessity of reducing its ideals and principles into action. Christ taught truth as a way of life; the new things He insisted on, self-denial, love of neighbor, civic fidelity, were not matters of speculation merely, but of conduct. What He taught He bade His Apostles and their followers to teach all nations, even to the consummation of the world. All this was wholly different from the speculative and uncertain maxims of morality taught by paganism . He laid stress on the work and worth of the individual, and gave men a new sense of personality. He brought about respect for womanhood, for the sanctity of marriage, and for the ties of home life. He spoke with authority and with finality on the truths which had perplexed the pagan world, the existence of God, the moral order, immortality, the value of the present and of the future life.

The Apostles were real teachers; witness the Acts. Their followers imitated them and made use of the literatures, the philosophy, history, and science of the day when instructing catechumens or candidates for the priesthood, preaching, writing, and setting forth for the world the reasonableness of Christianity. The ritual of the Church, by its ceremonial and symbolism, appealed to sense, imagination, memory, and feeling. It too is knowledge in action since the faithful actually take part in it. So also is the study of history, of the types and ideals in the Old and New Testament, of the leaders and heroes of Christianity and its saints. The Church gave civilization and culture to the rude people from the North. It was the chief educational agency during the Middle Ages, and the home and the State cooperated with it in this function. With barbarism invading and the old civilization disappearing, the work of the Church in education had to be creative as well as constructive. The monasteries first were its centers, preserving ancient texts, and forming an organized body of teachers dedicated to their tasks. The schools followed, developing into the universities. In them Greek culture was harmonized with Christianity. Popes and secular rulers chartered and helped in many instances to found them. They aimed at maintaining complete faculties for the study of religion and science.

With the Reformation came the rupture between the two, the separation of morals and religion from philosophy and science generally. Then followed the sequestration of the universities, the confiscation of the monasteries , the opposition of governments, the ostracism of Catholics in many countries, in a word, the devastation of the work of the Church for centuries. It is only within the past 25 years that scholars, led by men like Denifle, Rashdall, and by Haskins and Rand, in the United States, and the Mediaeval Society, have begun to show what the Church had done to save and promote learning and develop civilization and culture. The story of the gradual recovery, by the Church, of its proper position in this respect will some day read like an epic of education. Beginning with the establishment of seminaries after the plan of the Council of Trent, of the academies and colleges of the religious orders, notably of the Jesuits and Benedictines , of the elementary schools in parishes and other centers, the Church today has a vast system of education in almost every country. This it maintains not only for teaching religion, but for teaching the entire cycle of human science, and for restoring the union which should exist between both. Gradually the schools founded under the control of various Protestant sects have become secularized. Religion has little or no place in them. On the contrary, besides being excluded, it is made little of, if not dismissed as a superstition. Leaders of the various churches are becoming alive to this situation and attempting to remedy it. Religion, not speculation only, but practical also, is more and more recognized as an essential of any education that prepares men and women for life. On the necessity of the study of morals in education all agree, but that is impossible without religion. This is why the Church insists on parents providing for the education of their children in religion, and, as a rule, in Catholic schools.

Fuente: New Catholic Dictionary

Education

IN GENERAL

In the broadest sense, education includes all those experiences by which intelligence is developed, knowledge acquired, and character formed. In a narrower sense, it is the work done by certain agencies and institutions, the home and the school, for the express purpose of training immature minds. The child is born with latent capacities which must be developed so as to fit him for the activities and duties of life. The meaning of life, therefore, of its purposes and values as understood by the educator, primarily determines the nature of his work. Education aims at an ideal, and this in turn depends on the view that is taken of man and his destiny, of his relations to God, to his fellowmen, and to the physical world. The content of education is furnished by the previous acquisition of mankind in literature, art, and science, in moral, social, and religious principles. The inheritance, however, contains elements that differ greatly in value, both as mental possessions and as means of culture; hence a selection is necessary, and this must be guided largely by the educational ideal. It will also be influenced by the consideration of the educative process. Teaching must be adapted to the needs of the developing mind, and the endeavour to make the adaption more thorough results in theories and methods which are, or should be, based on the findings of biology, physiology, and psychology.

The work of education begins normally in the home; but it is, for obvious reasons, continued in institutions where other teachers stand in place of the parents. To secure efficiency it is necessary that each school be properly organized, that the teachers be qualified and that the subjects of instruction be wisely chosen. Since the school, moreover, is so largely responsible for the intellectual and moral formation of those who will later, as members of society, be useful or harmful, there is evidently needed some higher direction than that of the individual teacher, in order that the purpose of education may be realized. Both the Church and the State, therefore, have interests to safeguard; education is to strive for the true ideal through the obvious that education at any given time expresses while, in its practical control, the existing relations between the temporal power and the spiritual assume concrete form. As, moreover, these ideas and relations have varied considerably in the course of time, it is quite intelligible that a solution of the central educational problems should be sought in history; and it is furthur beyond question that histoical study, in this as in other departments, has a manifold utility. But a mere recital of facts is of little avail unless certain fact of Christian revelation be given its due importance. It is needful, then, to distinguish the constant elements in education from those that are variable; the former including man’s nature, destiny, and relations to God, the latter all those changes in theory, conduct of educational work. It is with the first aspect of the subject that the present article is mainly concerned; and from this standpoint education may be defined as that form of social activity whereby, under the direction of mature minds and by the use of adequate means, the physical, intellectual, and moral powers of the immature human being are so developed as to prepare him for the accomplishment of his lifework here and for the attainment of his eternal destiny. Neither this nor any other definition was formulated from the beginning. In primitive times the helplessness and needs of the child were so obvious that his elders by a natural impulse gave him a training in the rude arts that enabled him to procure the necessaries of life, while they taught him to proptitate the hidden powers in each object of nature, and handed on to him the tribal customs and traditions. But of education properly so called the savage knows nothing, and much less does he busy himself with theory or plan. Even civilized peoples carry on the work of education for a long time before they begin to reflect upon its meaning, and such reflection is guided by philosophical speculation and by established social, religious, and political institutions. Often, too, their theorizing is the workof exceptional minds, and presents a higher ideal than might be inferred from their educational practice. Nevertheless, an account of what was done by the principal peoples of antiquity will prove useful by bringing out the profound modification which Christianity wrought.

ORIENTAL EDUCATION

The invention of writing was of the utmost importance for the developments of language and the keeping of records. The earliest texts, chiefly of a religious nature, became the sources of knowledge and the means of education. Such were in China the writings of Confucius, in India the Vedas, in Egypt the Book of the Dead, in Persia the Avesta. The main purpose in having these books studied by youth was to secure uniformity of thought and custom, and unvarying conformity with the past. In this respect Chinese education is typical. The sacred writings contained minute prescriptions for conduct in every circumstance and station of life. These the pupil was obliged to memorize in a purely mechanical fashion; whether he understood the words as he repeated them was quite indifferent. He simply stored his memory with a multitude of established forms and phrases, which subsequently he employed in the preparation of essays and in passing the governmental examinations. That he should learn to think for himself was of course out of the question.

With such a training, the development of free personality was impossible. In China, the family, with its sacred traditions and its ancestor-worship was controlled by the State; in Egypt by the priesthood; in India by the different castes. There was, doubtless, in the Oriental mind a consciousness of personality; but no effort was made to strengthen it and give it value. On the contrary, the Hindu philosophy, which regarded knowledge as the means of redemption from the miseries of life, placed that redemption itself in nirvana, the extinction of the individual through absorption into the being of the world. The position of women was, in general, a degraded one. Though the early training of the child devolved upon the mother, her responsibility brought with it no dignity. But little provision was made for the education of girls; their only vocation was to marry, bear childdren, and render service to the head of the family.

In view of these facts, it cannot be said that education as the Western world conceives it owes any great debt to the East. It is true that some of the sciences, mathematics, astronomy, and chronology, and some of the arts, as sculpture and architecture, were carried to a certain degree of perfection; but the very success of Oriental ability and skill in these lines only emphasizes by contrast the deficiencies of Oriental education. Even in the sphere of morality the same antagonism appears between precept and practice. It cannot and need not be denied that many of the sayings, e.g. of Confucius, evince a high ideal of virtue, while some of the Hindu proverbs, such as those of the “Pantscha-tantra”, are full of practical wisdom. Yet these facts only make it more difficult to answer the question: Why was the actual living of these people so far removed from the formally accepted standards of virtue? Nevertheless, Oriental education has a peculiar significance; it shows quite plainly the consequences of sacrificing the individual to the interests of human institutions, and of reducing education to a machine like process, the aim of which is to mould all minds upon one unchanging pattern; and it further shows how little can be accomplished for real education by despotic authority, which demands, and is satisfied with, an outward observance of custom and law. (See Davidson. A History of Education, New York, 1901.)

THE GREEKS

If the education of the Oriental peoples was stationary, that of the Greeks exhibits a progressive development which passes from one extreme to another through a variety of movements and reactions, of ideals and practice. What remains constant throughout is the idea that the purpose of education is to train youth for citizenship. This, however, was conceived, and its realization attempted, in different ways by the several City-States. In Sparta, the child, according to the Code of Lycurgus, was the property of the State. From his seventh year onward he received a public training whose one object was to make him a soldier, by developing physical strength, courage, self control, and obedience to law. It was a hard training in gymnastic exercises, with little attention to the intellectual side and less to the aesthetic; even music and dancing took on a military character. Girls were subjected to the same severe discipline, not so much to emphasize the equality of the sexes as to train the sturdy mothers of a warrior race.

The ideal of Athenian education was the completely developed man. Beauty of mind and body, the cultivaation of every inborn faculty and energy, harmony between thought and life, decorum, temperance, and regularity — such were the results aimed at in the home and in the school, in social intercourse, and in civic relation. “We are lovers of the beautiful”, said Pericles, “yet simple in our tastes, and we cultivate the mind without the loss of manliness” (Thucydides, II, 40). The means of culture were music and gymnastics, the former including history, poetry, the drama, oratory, and science, along with music in the narrower sense; while the latter comprised games, atheltic exercises, and the training for military duty. That music was no mere “accomplishment” and that gymnastics had a higher aim than bodily strength or skill is evident from what Plato tells us in the Protagoras. The Greeks indeed laid stress on courage, temperances, and obedience to law; and if their theoretical disquisitions could be taken as fair accounts of their actual practice, it would be difficult to find, among the products of human thinking, a more exalted ideal. The essential weakness of their moral education was the failure to provide adequate sanction for the principles they formulated and for the counsels they gave to youth. The practice of religion, whether in public services or in household worship exerted but little influence upon the formation of character. The Greek deities, after all, were no models for imitation; some of them could scarcely have been objects of reverence, since they were endowed with the weaknesses and passions of men. Religion itself was mechanical and external; it did not touch conscience nor awaken the sense of sin. As to the future life, the Greeks believed in the immortality of the soul; but this belief had little or no practical significance. Thus the motive for virtuous action was found, not in respect for Divine law nor in the hope of eternal reward, but simply in the desire to temper in due proportion the elements of human nature. Virtue is not self-repression for the sake of duty, but, as Plato says, “a kind of health, and beauty and good habit of the soul”; while vice is “a disease and deformity and sickness of it.” The just man will so regulate his own character as to be on good terms with himself, and to set those three principles {reasons, passion, and desire} in tune together, as if they were verily three chords of a harmony, a higher, and a lower, and a middle, and whatever may lie between these; and after he had bound all these together and reduced the many elelments of his nature to a real unity as a temperate and duly harmonized man, he will then at length proceed to do whatever he may have to do. (Republic, IV, 443) This conception of virtue as a self-balancing was closely bound up with that idea of personal worth which has already been mentioned as the central element in Greek life and education. But the personality referred to was not that of man for the sake of his humanity, nor even that of the Greek for the sake of his nationality; it was the personality of the free citizen, and from citizenship the artisian and the slaves were excluded. The mechanical arts were held in bad repute; and Aristotle declares that “they render the body and soul or intellect of free persons unfit for the exercise and practice of virtue” (Politics, V, 1337). A still more serious limitation, affecting not only their concept of human dignity, but their regard for human life as well, consisted in the exposure of children. This was practised at Sparta by the public authority, which destroyed the child that was unfit for the service of the State; while at Athens the fate of his offspring was committed to the father and might be decided in accordance with purely personal interests. The mother’s position was not much better than it had been in the Orient. Women were generally regarded as inferior beings, “impotent for good, but clever contrivers of all evil” (Euripdes, Medea, 406). At best she was a means to an end, the bearing of children and the care of the household; her education consequently was of the scantiest sort. The only exceptions were the hetaerae, i.e. the women who were outside the home circle and who with greater freedom of living combined higher culture than the legitimate wife could hope for. Under such circumstances marriage implied for woman a lowering of personal worth that was in marked contrast with the ideals set up for the education of men.

These ideals, again, underwent a decided change during the fifth century B.C. In one respect at least it was a change for the better; it extended the rights of citizenship. The constitution of Solon was set aside and that of Clisthenes adopted in its stead (509 B.C.) The democratic character of the latter, with the increase in prosperity at home and the widening of foreign relations, afforded new opportunities for individual ability and endeavour. This heightened activity, however, was not put forth in behalf of the common good, but rather for the advancement of personal interests. At the same time morality was deprived of even the outward support it had formerly drawn from religion; philosophy gave way to scepticism; and education, while it became more intellectual, laid emphasis on form rather than on content. The most influential teachers were the Sophists, who supplied the growing demand for instruction in the art of public discussion and offered information on every sort of subject. Developing in practical directions the principle that “man is the measure of all things”, they carried individualism to the extreme of subjectivism alike in the sphere of speculative thought and in that of moral conduct. The purposes of education were correspondingly modified, and new problems arose. Now that the old standards and basis of morality had been rejected, the main question was to replace them by others in which due allowance would be made on the one hand for individuality and on the other for social needs. The answer of Socrates was: “Know thyself” and “Knowledge is virtue”, i.e. a knowledge drawn from personal experience, yet possessing universal validity; and the means prescribed by him for obtaining such knowledge was his maieutics, i.e. the art of giving birth to ideas through the method of question and answer, by which he developed the power of thinking. As an intellectual discipline, this scheme had undoubted value; but it left unsolved the chief problem; how is knowledge, even of the highest kind, to be translated into action? Plato offered a twofold solution. In the Republic, setting out from his general theory that the idea alone is real, and that the good of each thing consists in harmony with the idea when it originated, he reaches the conclusion that knowledge consists in the perception of this harmony. The aim of education, therefore, is to develop knowledge of the good. So far, this scheme contains little more promise of practical results than that of Socrates. But Plato adds that society is to be ruled by those who attain to this knowledge, i.e. by the philosophers; the other two classes, soldiers, and artisans, are subordinate, yet each individual being asigned to the class for which his abilities fit him, reaches the highest self-development and contributes his share to the social weal. In the Laws, Plato attempts to revise and combine certain elements of the Spartan and of the Athenian system but this reactionary scheme met with no success.

This problem, finally, was taken up by Aristotle in the Ethics and the Politics. As in his philosophy, so in his educational theory, he departs from Plato’s teaching. The goal for the individual as well as for society is happiness: “What we have to aim at is for the happiness of each citizen, and happiness consists in a complete activity and practice of virtue” (Politics, IV). More precisely, happiness is “the conscious activity of the highest part of man according to the law of his own excellence, not unaccompanied by adequate, external conditions.” Merely to know the good does not constitute virtue; this knowledge must issue in practice the goodness of the intellect (knowledge of universal truth) must be combined with goodness of action. The three things which make men good and virtuous — nature, habit, and reason — must be in harmony with one another (for they do not always agree); men do many things against habit and nature, if reason persuades them that they ought. We have already determined what natures are likely to be most easily moulded by the hands of the legislator. All else is the work of education; we learn some things by habit and some by instruction. (Politics, Bk. VII) Education, however, must always be adapted to the peculiar character of the State: “The citizen should be moulded to suit the form of government under which he lives” (ibid., VIII). And again, “It is right that the citizens should possess a capacity for affairs and for war, but still more for the enjoyment of peace or leisure; right that they should be capable of such actions as are indispensable and salutary, but still more of such as are moral per se. It is with a view to these objects, then, that they should be educated while they are still children, and at all other ages, till they pass beyond the need of education” (ibid., IV). “Neither must we suppose that any one of the citizens belongs to himself, for they all belong to the State, and are each of them a part of the State, and the care of each part is inseperable from the care of the whole” (ibid., VII).

In the theories of Plato and Aristotle are found the highest reaches of hellenic thought regarding the prupose and nature of education. Each of these great thinkers established schools of philosophy, and each has profoundly affected the thought of all subsequent time, yet neither succeeded in providing an education sound and permanent enought to avert the moral and political downfall of the nation. The diffusion of Greek thought and culture throughout the world by conquest and colonization was no remedy for the evils which sprang from an exaggerated individualism. Once the idea wa accepted that each man is his own standard of conduct, neither brilliancy of literary production nor fineness of philosophic speculation could prevent the decay of patriotism, and of a virtue which had never looked higher than the State for its sanction. Aristotle himself, at the close of his Ethics, points out the radical difficulty: Now if arguments and theories were able by themselves to make people good, they would, in the words of Theognis, be entitled to receive high and great rewards, and it is with theories that we should have to provide ourselves. But the truth apparently is that, though they are strong enough to encourage and stimulate young men of liberal minds, though they are able to inspire with goodness a character that is naurally noble and sincerely loves the beautiful, they are incapable of converting the mass of men to goodness and beauty of character. No such “conversion” was aimed at by the Sophists. Appealing to the natural tendencies of the individual, they developed a spirit of selfishness which in turn broke out in discord, thus opening the way for the conquest of Greece by Roman arms.

THE ROMANS

In striking contrast with the Greek character, that of the Romans was practical, utilitarian, grave, austere. Their religion was serious, and it permeated their whole life, hallowing all its relations. The family, especially, was far more sacred than in Sparta or Athens, and the position of woman as wife and mother more exalted and influential. Still, as with the Greeks, the power of the father over the life of his child — patria potestas — was absolute, and, in the earlier period at least, the exposure of children was a common practice. In fact the laws of the Twelve Tables provided for the immediate destruction of deformed offspring and gave the father, during the whole life of his children, the right to imprison, sell, or slay them. Subsequently, however, a check was placed on such practices. The ideal at which the Roman aimed was neither harmony nor happiness, but the performance of duty and the maintenance of his rights. Yet this ideal was to be realized through service to the State. Deep as was the family feeling, it was always subordinate to devotion to the public weal. “Parents are dear,” said Cicero, “and children and kindred, but all loves are bound up in the love of our common country” (DeOfficiis, I, 17). Education therefore was essentially a preparation for civic duty. “The children of the Romans are brought up that they may one day be able to be of service to the fatherland, and one must accordingly instruct them in the customs of the State and in the institutions of their ancestors. The fatherland has produced and brought us up that we may devote to its use the finest capacitites of our mind, talent, and understanding. Therefore we must learn those arts whereby we may be of greatest service to the State; for that I hold to be the highest wisdom and virtue.”

These words express, at any rate, the spirit of the early Roman education. The home was the early school, and the parents the only teachers. Of scientific and aesthetic training there was little or none. To learn the Laws of the Twelve Tables, to become familiar with the lives of the men who had made Rome great and to copy the virtues which he saw in the father were the chief endeavour of the boy and youth. Thus the moral element predominated, and virtues of a practical sort were inculcated: first of all pietas, obedience to parents and to the gods: then prudence, fair dealing, courage, reverence, firmness, and earnestness or philisophical reasoning, but through the imitation of worthy models and, as far as possible, of living and concrete examples. Vitæ discimus, “We learn for life,” said Seneca; and this phrase sums up the whole purpose of Roman education. In the course of time, elementary schools (ludi) were opened, but they were conducted by private teachers and were supplemented to the home instruction. About the middle of the third century B.C. foreign influence began to make themselves felt. The works of the Greeks translated into Latin, Greek teachers were introduced and schools established in which the educational characteristics of the Greeks reappeared. Under the direction of the literatus and the grammaticus education took on a literary character, while in the school of the rhetor the art of oratory was carefully cultivated. The importance which the Romans attached to eloquence is clearly shown by Cicero in his “De Oratore” and by Quintilian in his “Institutes”; to produce the orator became eventually the chief end of education. Quintilian’s work, moreover, is the principal contribution to educational theory produced in Rome. The hellenizing process was a gradual one. The vigorous Roman character yielded but slowly to the intellectualism of the Greeks, and when the latter finally triumphed, far-reaching changes had come about in Roman society government, and life. Whatever the causes of decline — political, economic, or moral — they could not be stayed by the imported refinement of Greek thought and practice. Nevertheless, pagan education as a whole, with its ideals, successes, and failures, has a profound significance. It was the practical, that the world has known. It pursued in turn the ideals that appeal most strongly to the human mind. It engaged the thought of the greatest philosophers and the action of the wisest legislators. Art, science, and literature were placed at its service, and the mighty influence of the State was exerted in its behalf. In itself, therefore, and in its results, it shows how much and how little human reason can accomplish when it seeks no guidance higher than itself and strives for no purposes other than those which find, or may find, their realization in the present phase of existence.

THE JEWS

Among the pre-Christian peoples the Jews occupy a unique position. As the recipients and custodians of Divine revelation, their conception of life and morality were far above those of the Gentiles. God manifested Himself to them directly as a Person, a Spirit, and an ethical Being, guiding them by His providence, making known to them His will, and prescribing the minutest details of life and religious practice. Throughout the Old Testament, God appears as the teacher of His chosen people. He sets before them a standard of righteousness which in none other than Himself: “You shall be holy, because I am holy” (Leviticus 11:46). Through Moses and the Prophets He gives them His Commandments and the promises of a Messiah to come. But He also placed upon them the duty of instructing their children. Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord. Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with they whole strength. And these words which I command thee this day, shall be in thy heart: and thou shalt tell them to thy children, and thou shalt meditate upon them sitting in thy house, and walking on thy journey, sleeping and rising. (Deuteronomy 6:4-7) In accordance with this injunction, education, at least in the earlier period, was given chiefly in the home. Jewish family life, indeed, far surpassed that of the Gentiles in the purity of its relations, in the position it secured to woman, and in the care which it bestowed on children, who were regarded as a blessing vouchsafed by God and destined for His service by fidelity to the Divine law. An important function of the synagogue also was the instruction of youth, which was committed to the scribes and the doctors. Schools, as such, came into existence only in the later period, and even then the teaching was permeated by religion. Though the Old Testament, contains no theory of education in the stricter sense, it abounds in maxims and principles which are all the more weighty because they are inspired by Divine wisdom and because they have a practical bearing upon life. God Himself showed the dignity of the teacher’s office when he declared: “They that are learned shall shine as the brightness of the firmament: and they that instruct many to justice, as stars for all eternity” (Dan., xii, 3). In the light, however, of a more perfect revelation, it is clear that God’s dealings with Israel had an ultimate purpose which was to be realized “in the fullness of time.” Not only the utterances of the Prophets, but many signal events in the history of the Jews and many of their ritual observances were types of the Messiah; as St. Paul says, “All these things happened to them in figure” (1 Corinthians 10:11), and “The law was our pedagogue in Christ” (Galatians 3:24). As the Supreme Teacher of mankind, God, while imparting to them the truth which they presently needed, also prepared the way for the greater truths of the Gospel.

CHRISTIAN EDUCATION

As in many other respects so for the work of education, the advent of Christianity is the most important epoch in the history of mankind. Not only does the Christian conception of life differ radically from the pagan view, not only does the Christian teaching impart a new sort of knowledge and lay down a new principle of action, but Christianity, moreover, supplies the effectual means of making its ideals actual and of carrying its precepts into practice. Through all vicissitudes of conflict and adjustment, of changing civilizations and varying opinions, in spite even of the shortcomings of its own adherents, Christianity has steadfastly held up before men the life and the lessons of its Divine Founder.

Jesus Christ as Teacher

“God who, at sundry-times and in divers manners, spoke in times past to the fathers by the prophets, last of all, in these days hath spoken to us by his Son” (Hebrews 1:1-2). This communication through the God-Man was to reveal the true way of living: “The grace of God our Saviour hath appeared to all men; instructing us, that, denying ungodliness and worldly desires, we should live soberly, and justly, and godly in this world, looking for the blessed hope and coming of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ” (Titus, ii 11, 12). Of Himself and His mission Christ declared, “I am come a light into the world; that whosoever believeth in me, may not remain in darkness” (John 12:46); and again, “For this was I born, and for this came I into the world; that I should give testimony to the truth” (John 18:37). The knowledge which He came to impart was no mere intellectual possession or theory: “I am come that they may have life, and may have it more abundantly” (John 10:10). He taught therefore, as one “having authority”; He insisted that His heirs should believe the truths which He taught, even though these might seem to be “hard sayings.” His doctrines, indeed, made no appeal either to pride of intellect or to selfishness or to passion. For the most part, as in the Sermon on the Mount, they were dramatically opposed to the maxims that had obtained in the pagan world. They were, in the highest sense, supernatural, not only in proposing eternal life as the ultimate goal of man’s existence and action, but also in enjoining the denial of self as the chief requisite for attaining that destiny. Service to the neighboor was insisted upon, but this was to be rendered in the spirit of love, the new commandments which Christ gave (John 13:34). Faithfulness also to civic duty was required, but the sanction which imparted force to such obligation was man’s elevation to a higher citizenship in the Kindgom of God. To strive after this and to realize it in one’s earthly life, so far as possible, was the ideal to which every other good was subordinate; “Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his justice, and all these things shall be added unto you” (Matthew 6:33).

Truths of this kind, so far removed from the natural tendencies of human thought and desire, could be imparted only by one who embodied in himself all the qualifications of a perfect teacher. The philosophers no doubt might, and did, formulate beautiful theories regarding knowledge and virtue; but Christ alone could say to His disciples: “I am the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6). And whatever worth they attached in theory to personality was of far less ideal in Christ’s own Person. He could thus rightfully appeal to that imitative tendency which is so deeply rooted in man’s nature and from which so much is expected in modern education. The axiom, also, that we learn by doing and that knowledge gets its full value only when it issues in action, finds its best exemplification in Christ’s dealings with His disciples. He “began to do and to teach” (Acts 1:1). In His miracles he gave evidence of His power over all nature and therefore of His authority to require faith in His words: “The works themselves which I do give testimony of me, that the Father hath sent me” (John 5:36). To His disciples, when they hesitated or were slow to realize that the Father abided in Him, the answer was given: “Otherwise believe for the very works’ sake” (xiv, 12). What He demanded in turn was no mere outward profession of faith or loyalty: “Not every one that saith to me Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doth the will of my Father” (Matthew 7:21).

The necessity of manifesting belief through action is constantly pointed out both in the literal teaching of Christ and in His parables. These, again, illustrate His practical wisdom as a teacher. They were drawn from objects and circumstances with which His hearers were familiar. In each instance they were adapted to the manner of thinking suggested by the local surroundings and the customs of the people; and they were often called forth by an incident that seemed unimportant or by a question which was asked now by His followers and again by His tireless enemies. Thus the simplest things of nature — the vine, the lily, the fig-tree, the birds of the air, and the grass of the field — were made to yield lessons of the deepest moral significance. His aim wa not to adorn His own discorse, but rather to bring its content into the minds of his hearers more vividly, and to secure for it greater permanence by associating in their thought some supernatural truth with the facts of daily experience. Sensory perception, memory, and imagination were thus developed to form a mental setting for the great truths of the Kindgom. The same principle found its appreciation in the institution of the sacraments whereby natural elements are made the outward signs of inward grace. As St. John Chrysostom aptly says, If you were incorporeal, he would have bestowed on you incorporeal gifts in their bare reality; but because the soul is bound up with the body, he gives you intelligible things under sensible forms. (Homilia, lx, as populum Antioch) In fact the whole teaching of Christ is the clearest proof of the principle that education must adapt itself in method and practice to the needs of those who are to be taught. In accordance with this principle He prepared the minds of His followers beforehand for the institution of the Holy Eucharist for His own death, and for the coming of the Holy Ghost (John 6:14-15); and he even reserved certain truths to be made known by the Paraclete: “I have yet many things to say to you: but you cannot bear them now. But when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will teach you all truth” (xvi, 12, 13). Thus the completion of His work as a teacher is left not to human conjecture or speculation, nor to the theories of philosophical schools, but to the Spirit of God Himself. This of course was best realized by those who were nearest to Him; yet even those of the Jews who were not among the Apostles, but were, like Nicodemus, disposed to judge fairly, confessed His superiority: “We know that thou art come a teacher from God; for no man can do these signs which thou dost, unless God be with him” (John 3:2).

The Aim of Christian Education

Had Christ’s mission ended when He quitted the earth, He would still have been in word and work the ideal teacher, and would have influenced for all time the education of mankind so far as its ultimate aims and basic principles are concerned. But as a matter of fact, He made ample provision for the perpetuatuion of His work by training a select body of men who for three years were constantly under His direction and were thoroughly imbued with His spirit. To these Apostles, moreover He gave the command: “Going therefore, teach ye all nations . . . . and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world” (Matthew 27:19, 20). These words are the charter of the Christian Church as a teaching institution. While they refer directly to the doctrine of salvation, and therefore to the imparting of religious truth, they nevertheless, or rather by the very nature of that truth and its consequences for life, carry with them the obligation of insisting on certain principles and maintaining certain characterisitcs which have a decisive bearing on all educational problems.

1. The truth of Christianity is to be made known to all men. It is not confined to any one race or nation or class, nor is it to be the exclusive possession of highly gifted minds. This characteristic of universality is in plain contrast with the highest conceptions of the pagan world. The cultured Greek had only contempt for the barbarian, and the Roman looked upon outside nations a subjects to be governed rather than as people to be taught. But at Athens also and at Rome there was the distinction between free citizens and slaves, in consequence of which the latter were excluded from the benefits of education. As against these narrow limitations Christ charged His apostles to “teach all men”; and St. Paul, in the same spirit, professes himself a debtor to all men, Greeks and barbarians, the wise and the unwise alike. All, in fact, were to be dealt with as children of the same Heavenly Father and heirs of the Kingdom of God. In respect of these supernatural perogatives, the distinctions which had hitherto prevailed were set aside: Christianity appeared as one vast school with mankind at large for its disciples.

2. The commission given to the Apostles was not to expire with them; it was to remain in force “all days, even to the consummation of the world.” Perpetuity, therefore, is an essential feature in the educational work of Christianity. The institution of paganism had indeed flourished and advanced from phase to phase of development, but they did not contain the element of enduring vitality. In the higher departments of learning, as in philosophy, school had followed school into vigour and into decay. And in education itself, one ideal after another had been put forward only to be displaced. Christianity, on the contrary, while it could never become a rigid system, held up to mankind certain unchangeable truths which should serve as criteria for determining the value of every fundamental theroy of life and of education. By insisting, especially, that man’s destiny was to be attained, not in any form of temporal service or success but in union with God, it proposed an ideal which should be valid for all time and amid all the variations of human thought and endeavour. That such changes would inevitably come to pass, Christ, without doubt, foresaw. In view of these, a merely human teacher would have provided for the stability of his work by devices which would, if successful, have attested his foresight, or shrewdness, or knowledge of human nature. But Christ s guarantee to the Apostles is at once simpler and surer: “Behold I am with you all days.” The task of instructing the world in Christian truth would have been impossible but for this permanent abiding of Christ with His appointed teachers. On the other hand, once the force of His promise is realized, the significance of Christianity as a perpetual institution becomes evident: it means that Christ, Himself through a visible agency was to continue for all time the work He began during His earthly life as Teacher of the human race.

3. It has already been pointed out that some of the pagan peoples, and notably the Greeks, had attained a very high conception of personality; and it has also been shown that this conception was by no means perfect. The teaching of Christianity in this respect is so far superior to any other that if a single element could be designated as fundamental in Christian education it would be the emphasis which it lays on the worth of the individual. In the first place, Christianity had its origin, not in any abstract speculation as to goodness or virtue, but in the actual, concrete life of a Person who was absolutely perfect. It was not, then, obliged to cast about for the ideal man, or to present a theory as to what that ideal might possibly be: it passed the most exalted ideas of human wisdom. In Christ first appeared the full dignity of human nature through its elevation personal union with the Word of God; and in Him, as never before or since, were manifest those traits which furnish the noblest models for imitation.

Christianity, furthermore, elevated human personality by the value it set upon each human soul as created by God and destined for eternal life. The State is no longer the supreme arbiter, nor is service to the public weal the ultimate standard. These, it is true within their legitimate sphere have just claims upon the individual. Christianity by no means teaches that such claims can be disgregarded or the corresponding duties neglected, but rather that the discharge of all social and civic obligations will be more thorough when subordianted to, and inspired by, fidelity in the duties that man owes to God. While the value of personality is thus enhanced, the sense of responsibility is correspondingly increased; so that the freer development of the person is not allowed to culminate in selfishness nor in that extreme individualism which is a threat to social organization.

4. From these principles Christianity drew consequences which were totally at variance with the thought and practice of paganism. The position of woman was lifted at once to a higher plane; she ceased to be a chattel, or a mere instrument of passion, and became the equal of man, with the same personal worth and the same eternal destiny. Marriage was no longer a union entered into through caprice or convention, but an indissoluble bond involving mutual rights and duties. Moreover, it was raised to the dignity of a sacrament, which not only sanctified the marital relation and its purposes, but also conferred the graces needful for the due fulfilment of its obligations. The whole meaning of the family was thus transformed. Parental authority was indeed maintained, but such an exercise of the patria potestas as the destruction or the exposure of children could not have been tolerated once it was realized that the child’s personality also is sacred, and that parents are responsible not simply to the State, but also to God, for the proper education of their offspring. Christianity, moreover, laid upon the child the duty of respecting and obeying his parents, not out of servile fear or hard necessity, but through a spirit of reverence and filial love. The ties of home-life were thereby strengthened, and the whole work of education took on a new character because it was consecrated in its very source by religion.

5. In respect of its content Christianity opened up to the human mind wide realms of truth which unaided reason could not possibly have attained, and which nevertheless are of far deeper import for life than the most learned speculations of pagan thought. Upon those truths, also, which the philosophers had but vaguely discerned, or about which they had remained in doubt, it shed a new light. There could be no further questioning, for the Christian, as to the existence of a personal God, the reality of His providence, the immortality of the soul, the freedom of the will, and the resulting accountability of man to Divine Justice. Above all, the nature of the moral order was set forth in unmistakable terms. Christianity insisted that morality was not mere outward conformity to custom or law, but the inner rectitude of the will, that aesthetic refinement was of far less consequence than purity of heart, and that love of the neighbour as proven in deed, not personal gain or advantage, was the true norm of human relationships. That such a conception of life, with its emphasis on really spiritual aims, must lead to the formation of educational ideals unknown to the pagan world, is obvious. But on the other hand it would be wrong to infer that Christianity, in its “other worldliness”, reduces or neglects the values of the present life. What it consistently maintains is, that life here gets it highest value by serving as a preparation for the life to come. The question is not whether one should live now without any regard to the future or look forward to the future with no concern for the present; but rather how one should profit by the opportunities of this life in such wise as as to secure the other. The problems, then, is one of establishing proportions, i.e. of determining values according to the standard of man’s eternal destiny. When education is defined as “preparation for complete living” (Herbert Spencer), the Christian can take no objection to the words as they stand; but he will insist that no living can be “complete” which leaves out of consideration the ultimate purpose of life, and hence that no education really “prepares” which thwarts that purpose or sets it aside. It is just this completeness — in teaching all men in harmonizing all truths, in elevating all relationships, and in leading the individual soul back to the Creator — that forms the essential characteristic of Christianity as an educational influence.

THE EDUCATIONAL WORK OF THE CHURCH

Next in importance to Christ’s personal teaching was the establishment of a teaching body whose mission was identical with His own: “As the Father hath sent me, I also send you” (John 20:21); and “He that heareth you, heareth me” (Luke 10:16). He was not content with proclaiming once for all the truths of the Gospel, nor did He leave its wider dissemination to individual enthusiasm or initiative; He founded a Church to carry on His work. The spread of His doctrine was entrusted, not to books, nor to schools of philosophy, nor to the governments of the world, but to an organization that spoke in His name and with his authority. No other body of teachers ever undertook so vast a work, and no other ever accomplished so much for education in the highest sense. Apart from the preaching of the Apostles, the earliest form of Christian instruction was that given to the catechumens (q.v.) in preparation for baptism. Its object was twofold: to impart a knowledge of Christian truth, and to train the candidate in the practice of religion. It was conducted by the bishop and, as the number of catechumens increased, by priests, deacons, and other clerics. Until the third century this mode of instruction was an important adjunct to the Apostolate; but in the fifth and sixth centuries it was gradually replaced by private instruction of the converts, who were then less numerous, and by the training given in other schools to those who had been baptized in infancy. The catechumenal schools, however, gave expression to the spirit which was to animate all subsequent Christian education: they were open to every one who accepted the faith, and they united religious instruction with moral discipline. The “catechetical” schools, also under the bishop’s supervision, prepared young clerics for the priesthood. The courses of study included philosophy and theology, and naturally took on an apologetic character in defense of Christian truth against the attacks of pagan learning. One of the oldest of these schools was at the Lateran in Rome; the most famous was that of Alexandria (see CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE).

In addition to this formal instruction, the Church from the beginning carried on through her worship and educational work embodying the deepest and soundest psychological principles. The ritual at first was of necessity simple; but as the Church was allowed a larger freedom, and her worship passsed from the catacombs to the basilica, statelier forms were introduced; yet their essential purpose was the same. The Mass, which has always been the central liturgical function, appeals to the mind through the medium of sense. It combines light and colour and sound, the action of the priest, and the dramatic movement that fills the sanctuary, especially in the more solemn service. Beneath these outward forms lies the inner meaning. The altar itself, in every detail, is full of a symbolism that brings vividly to mind the life and personality of Christ, the work of redemption, and the enduring sacrifice of the Cross. In due proportion, each item fo the liturgy conveys a lesson through eye and ear to the highest faculties of the soul. Sense, memory, imagination, and feeling are thus aroused, not simply as aesthetic activities, but as a support of intellect and will which thereupon issue in adoration and thanksgiving for the “mystery of faith.” On the other hand, the liturgy has always included in its purpose the participation of the faithful, and hence it prescribes the response of the people to the prayers at the altar, the chanting of certain portions of the service, bodily postures and movements in keeping with the various phases of the sacred rite. The faithful are not merely bystanders or onlookers; they are not to maintain a passive, receptive attitude, but rather to give active expression to the religious thought and feeling aroused in them. This is especially evident in the sacramental system. While each of the sacraments is a sign to be perceived, it is also a source of grace to be received; and the reception involves in each case a series of actions which manifest the faith and disposition of the recipent. Moreover, each sacrament is adapted to some particular need, and the whole system for sacraments, from baptism to extreme unction, builds up the spiritual life by processes of cleansing, strengthening, nourishing, and healing, which parallel the stage and requirements of organic growth.

In a larger way, also, the liturgical year, as it commemorates the principal events in the life of Christ, brings into Christian worship a variety which affects to some extent both the details of the liturgy itself and the religious feelings which it inspires — from the joy of Christmas to the triumph of Easter and Pentecost. For the due observance of the greater festivals the Church provides, as in Advent and Lent, by seasons of preparation. The Old Law with its types foreshadowed the New; the Baptist announce the Messiah; Christ himself prepared His disciples beforehand for the mystery of the Eucharist, for His death, and for the coming of the Holy Ghost. The Church, following the same practice arouses in the mind of the faithful those thoughts and feelings which form an apperceptive preparation for the central mysteries of faith and their proper observance at appointed times. Along with these greater solemnities come year by year the commemorations of the Christian heroes, the men and women who have walked in the footsteps of Christ, laboured for the spread of His kingdom, or even shed their blood for His sake. These are held up as models to be imitated, as realizations more or less perfect of the sublime ideal which is Christ Himself. And among the saints the foremost place is given to Mary the Mother of Christ, the ideal of Christian womanhood, to whom the Son of God was “subject” in the home at Nazareth. Each festival in her honour is at once an exhortation to copy her virtues and an evidence of the high station to which woman was raised by Christianity. The liturgy, then, is an application on a large scale of those principles which underlie all real teaching — appeal to the senses, association, apperpecption, expression, and imitation. The Church did not began by theorizing about these, nor did she wait for a psychological analysis to determine their value. Instructed by her founder, she simply incorporated in her liturgy those elements which were best fitted to teach men the truth and lead them to act in conformity with the Gospel. It is none the less significant that modern education is adopting for its own purposes, i.e. the teaching of secular subjects, the psychological principles which the Church from the beginning has put into practice.

While the Church, in her interior life and in the execution of her mission, gave proof of her vitality and of her ability to teach manking, she necessarily came into contact with influences and practices which were the legacy of paganism. In point of religious belief there was, of course, a clean breach between the polytheism of Athens and Rome and the doctrines of Christianity. But philosophy and literature were factors which had to be counted with as well as the educational system, which was still largely under pagan control. Schools had been opened by converts who were imbued with the ideas of Greek philosophy — by Justin at Rome, and Aristides at Athens; while, at Alexandria, Clement and Origen enjoyed the highest repute. These men regarded philosophy as a means of guiding reason to faith, and of defending that faith against the attacks of paganism. Others again, like Tertullian, condemned philosophy outright as something with which the Christian could have nothing to do. In regard to the pagan classics the conflict of opinion was even sharper. Some of the greatest theologians and Fathers, like St. Basil, St. Gregory Nazianzen, and St. Gregory of Nyssa, had studied the classics under pagan masters and were therefore in favour of sending Christian youths to non-Christian schools on the ground that literary studies would enable them the better to defend their religion. At the same time these Fathers would not permit a Christian to teach in such schools lest he should be obliged to take part in idolatrous practices. Tertullian (de Idolatriâ, c. x) insists on the same distinction, the teacher, he says, by reason of his authority, becomes in a way the “catechist of demons”; the pupil, imbued with Christian faith, profits by the letter of classical instruction, but rejects its false doctrine and holds aloof from the superstitious practices which the teacher can hardly avoid. Such a distinction was naturally the source of difficulties and gave rise to much discussion. The situation was not remedied by the edict of Julian the Apostate, forbidding the Christians to teach; though this called forth some protests and suggested the creation of a Christian literature based on classical models of style, nothing decisive resulted. On the other hand, fear of the corrupting influence of pagan literature had more and more alienated Christians from such studies; and it is not surprising to find among the opponents of the classics such men as St John Chrysostom, St. Ambrose, St Jerome, and St. Augustine. Though they had received a thorough classical education, and though they appreciated fully the worth of the pagan authors, their final attitude was adverse to the study of pagan literature. Apart from many controverted points in this subject, it is clear that the Fathers, at a time when the enviroment of the Church was still pagan, were far more anxious for the purity of faith and morals than for the cultivation of literature. In later ages, as the danger of contamination grew less, classical studies were revived and encouraged by the Church; but their value has more than once been questioned (see Lalanne, Influence des Pères de l’Englise sur l’éducation publique, Paris 1850).

Meanwhile the work of education was not neglected. If the Empire gave way before barbarian invasion, the Church found a new field of activity among the vigourous races of the North. To these she brought not only Christianity and civilization, but also the best elements of classical culture. Through her missionaries she became the teacher of Germany and France, of England and Ireland. The task was a difficult one, and its accomplisment was marked by many vicissitudes of temporary failure and hard-won success. At times, indeed, it would seem that the desire for learning had quite disappeared even among those for whom the acquisition of knowledge was a sacred obligation. Yet these drawbacks only served to stimulate the zeal of ecclesiastical and civil rulers in behalf of a more thorough and systematic education. Thus the salient feature of the Middle Ages is the co-operation of Church and State for the development of schools. Theodoric in Italy, Alfred in England, and Charlemagne in the Frankish Kingdom are illustrious examples of princes who joined their authority with that of bishops and councils to secure adequate instruction for clergy and people. Among churchmen it suffices to mention Chrodegand of Metz, Alcuin, St. Bede, Boethius, and Cassiodorus (see the several articles). As a result of their efforts, education was provided for the clergy in the cathedral schools under the direct supervision of the bishop and for the laity in parochial schools to which all had access. In the curriculum, religion held the first place; other subjects were few and elementary, comprising at best the trivium and quadrivium (see THE SEVEN LIBERAL ARTS). But the significance of this education lies not so much in its content as in the fact that it was the means of arousing a love of learning among peoples that had just emerged from barbarism, and of laying the foundations of Western culture and science. This history of education records no greater undertaking; for the task was not one of improving or perfecting, but of creating and had not the Church gone vigorously about her work, modern civilization would have been retarded for centuries. (See SCHOOLS; MIDDLE AGES.)

One of the chief factors in this progress was monasticism. The Benedictine monasteries especially were homes of study and depositories of the ancient learning. Not only sympathetic writers, like Montalembert, but those also who are more critical, acknowledge the service which the monks rendered to education. In those restless ages of rude culture, of constant warfare, of perpetual lawlessness and the rule of might, monasticism offered the one opportunity for a life of repose, of contemplation, and of that leisure and relief from the ordinary vulgar but necessary duties of life essential to the student . . . . Thus it happened that the monasteries were the sole schools for teaching; they offered the only professional training; they were the only universities of research; they alone served as publishing houses for the multiplication of books; they were the only libraries for the preservation of learning; they produced the only scholars; they were the sole educational institutions of this period. (Paul Monroe, A Text-Book in the History of Education, New York, 1907, p. 255) In addition to their prescribed studies, the monks were constantly occupied in copying the classic texts. While the Greek classics owed their safe preservation to the libraries of Constantinople and to the monasteries of the East, it is primarily to the monasteries of the West that we are indebted for the survival of the Latin classics. (Sandys, A History of Classical Scholarship, 2nd ed. Cambridge, 1906, p. 617) The specific work of education was carried on in the monastery school and was intended primarily for the novices. In some cases, however, a schola exterior, or outer school was added for lay students and for aspirants to the secular priesthood. The course of study included, besides the seven liberal arts, the reading of Latin authors and the music of the Church. Finally, through their annals and chronicles, the monks provided a rich store of information concerning medieval life, which is invaluable to the historian of that period. The Chief importance, however, of the monastic schools is found in the fact that they were conducted by an organized body of teachers who had withdrawn from the world and devoted their lives under the guidance of religion, to literary pursuits and educational work. The same Christianity that had sanctified the family now gave to the profession of teacher a sacredness and a dignity which made teaching itself a noble vocation.

Two other movements form the climax of the Church’s activity during the Middle Ages. The development of Scholasticism meant the revival of Greek philosophy, and in particular of Aristotle; but it also meant that philosophy was now to serve the cause of Christian truth. Men of faith and learning like Albertus Magnus and Thomas Aquinas, far from dreading or scorning the products of Greek thought, sought to make them the rational basis of belief. A synthesis was thus effected between the highest speculation of the pagan world and the teachings of theology. Scholasticism, moreover, was a distinct advance in the work of education; it was an intellectual training in method, in systematic thought, in severe logical reasoning, and in accuracy of statement. But taken as a whole, it furnished a great object-lesson, the purport of which was that, for the keenest intellect, the findings of reason and the truths of Revelation could be harmonized. Having used the subtilities of Greek thought to sharpen the student’s mind, the Church thereupon presented to him her dogmas without the least fear of contradiction. She thus united in a consistent whole whatever was best in pagan science and culture with the doctrine entrusted to her by Christ. If education be rightly defined as “the transmission of our intellectual and spiritual inheritance” (Butler), this definition is fully exemplified in the work of the Church during the Middle Ages.

The same synthetic spirit took concrete form in the universities (q.v.). In founding these the popes and the secular rulers co-operated; in university teaching all the then known branches of science were represented; the student body comprised all classes, laymen and clerics, seculars and religious; and the diploma conferred was an authorization to teach everywhere. The university was thus, in the educational sphere, the highest expression of that completeness which had all along characterized the teaching of the Church; and the spirit of inquiry which animated the medieval university remains, in spite of other modification, the essential element in the university of modern times. The changes which have since taken place have for the most part resulted in separating those elements which the Church had built into a harmonious unity. As Protestantism by rejecting the principle of authority brought about innumerable divisions in belief, so it led the way to rupture between Church and state in the work of education. The Renaissance in its extreme forms ranked pagan culture above everything else; and the Reformation in its fundamental tenet went beyond the individualism which led to the decline of Greek education. Once the schools were secularized, they fell readily under influences which transformed ideals, systems, and methods. Philosophy detached from theology formulated new theories of life and its values, that moved, at first slowly then more rapidly away from the positive teachings of Christianity. Science in turn cast off its allegiance to philosopy and finally proclaimed itself the only sort of knowledge worth seeking. The most serious practical result was the separation of moral and religious from purely intellectual education — a result which was due in part to religious differences and political changes, but also in large part to erroneous views concerning the nature and need of moral training. Such views again are in general derived from the denial, explicit or implicit, of the supernatural order and of its meaning for human life in its relations to God; so that, during three centuries past, the main endeavour outside the Catholic Church has been to establish education on a purely naturalistic basis, whether this be aesthetic culture or scientific knowledge, individual perfection or social service. In its earlier stages Protestantism, which laid so much stress on faith, could not consistently have sanctioned an education from which religious ideals were eliminated. But according a its principles worked out to their legitimate consquences, it became less and less capable of opposing the naturalistic movement. The Catholic Church has thus been obliged to carry on, with little or no help from other Christian bodies, the struggle in behalf of those truths on which Christianity is founded; and her educational work during the modern period may be described in general terms as the steadfast maintenance of the union between the natural and the supernatural.

From a human point of view the Church was under many disadvantages. The loss of the universities, the confiscation of monastic and other ecclesiatical property, and the opposition of various governments seemed to make her task hopeless. Yet these difficulties only served to call forth new manifestations of her vitality. The Council of Trent gave the impulse by decreeing that a more thorough education of the clergy should be secured through the seminaries (q.v.) and by urging upon bishops and priests the duty of building up the parochial schools. Similar measures were adopted by provincial and diocesan symbols throughout Europe. Then came the religious orders founded for the express purpose of education Catholic youth. (See especially INSTITUTE OF THE BROTHERS OF THE CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS; SOCIETY OF JESUS; ORATORIANS.) And to these finally must be added the numerous congregations of women who devoted their lives to the Christian training of girls. However different in organization and method, these institutions had for their common purpose the spread of religious truth along with secular knowledge among all classes. Thus there arose, by force of circumstances, a distinctly Catholic system of education, including parish schools, academics, colleges, and a certain number of universities which had remained under the control of the Church were founded anew by the Holy See. It is especially the parochial school that has served in recent times as an essentail factor in the work of religion. In some countries, e.g. Canada, it has received support from the Government; in others, as in the United States, it is maintained by voluntary contributions. As Catholics have also to pay their share of taxes for the public school system they are under a double burden; but this very hardship has only served to place in clearer light their practical loyalty to the principles on which Catholic education is based. In fact, the whole parochial school movement during the nineteenth century forms one of the most remarkable chapters in the history of education. It proves on one side that neither loss of the State’s co-operation nor lack of material resources can weaken the determination of the Church to carry on her educational work; and on the other side it shows what faith and devotional on the part of parents, clergy, and teachers can accomoplish where the interests of religion are at stake. (See SCHOOLS.) As this attitude and this action of Catholics place them in a position which is not always rightly understood, it may be useful to present here a statement of the principles on which the Church has based her course in the past, and to which she adheres unswervingly at the present time when the problems of education are the subject of so much discussion and the cause of agitation in various directions. The Catholic position may be outlined as follows: Intellectual education must not be separated from moral and religious education. To impart knowledge or to develop mental efficiency without building up moral character is not only contrary to psychological law, which requires that all the faculties should be trained but is also fatal both to the individual and to society. No amount of intellectual attainment or culture can serve as a substitute for virtue; on the contrary, the more thorough intellectual education becomes, the greater is the need for sound moral training. Religion should be an essential part of education; it should form not merely an adjunct to instruction in other subjects, but the centre about which these are grouped and the spirit by which they are permeated. the study of nature without any reference to God, or of human ideal with no mention of Jesus Christ, or of human legislation without Divine law is at best a one-sided education. The fact that religious truth finds no place in the curriculum is, of itself, and apart from any open negation of that truth, sufficient to warp the pupil’s mind in such a way and to such an extent that he will feel little concern in his school-days or later for religion in any form; and this result is the more likely to ensue when the curriculum is made to include everything that is worth knowing except the one subject which is of chief importance. Sound moral instruction is impossible apart from religious education. The child may be drilled in certain desirable habits, such as neatness, courtesy, and punctuality; he may be imbued with a spirit of honour, industry, and truthfulness — and none of this should be neglected; but if these duties towards self and neighbour are sacred, the duty towards God is immeasurably, more sacred. When it is faithfully performed, it includes and raises to a higher plane the discharge of every other obligation. Training in religion, moreover, furnishes the best motives for conduct and the noblest ideals for imitation, while it sets before the mind an adequate sanction in the holiness and justice of God. Religious education, it should be noted, is more than instruction in the dogmas of faith or the precepts of the Divine law; it is essentially a practical training in the exercises of religion, such as prayer, attendance at Divine workship, and reception of the sacraments. By these means conscience is purified, the will to do right is strengthened, and the mind is fortified to resist those temptations which, especially in the period of adolescence, threaten the gravest danger to the moral life. An education which unites the intellectual, moral and religious elements is the best safeguard for the home, since it places on a secure basis the various relations which the family implies. It also ensures the performance of social duties by inculcating a spirit of self-sacrifice, of obedience to law, and of Chrisitian love for the fellow-man. The most effectual preparation for the citizenship is that schooling in virtue which habituates a man to decide, to act, to oppose a movement or to further it, not with a view to personal gain nor simply in deference to public opinion, but in accordance with the standards of right that are fixed by the law of God. The welfare of the State, therefore demands that the child be trained in the practice of virtue and religion no less than in the pursuit of knowledge. Far from lessening the need of moral and religious training, the advance in educational methods rather emphasizes that need. Many of the so-called improvements in teaching are of passsing importance, and some are at variance with the laws of the mind. Upon their relative worth the Church does not pronounce, nor does she commit herself to any particular method provided the essentials of Christian education are secured, the Church welcomes whatever the sciences may contribute toward rendering the work of the school more efficient. Catholic parents are bound in conscience to provide for the education of their children, either at home or in schools of the right sort. As the bodily life of the child must be cared for, so, for still graver reasons, must the mental and moral faculties be developed. Parents, therefore, cannot take an attitude of indifference toward this essential duty nor transfer it wholly to others. They are responsible for those earliest impressions which the child receives passively, before he exercises any conscious selective imitation; and as the intellectual powers develop, the parents example is the lesson that sinks most deeply into the child’s mind. They are also obliged to instruct the child according to his capacity, in the truths of religion and in the practice of religious duties, thus co-operating with the work of the Church and the school. The virtues, especially of obedience, self-control, and purity, can nowhere be inculcated so thoroughly as in the home; and without such moral education by the parents, the task of forming upright men and women and worthy citizens is difficult, and if not impossible. That the need of moral and religious education has impressed the minds of non-Catholics also, is evident from the movement inaugurated in 1903 by the Religious Education Association in the United States, which meets annually and publishes its proceedings at Chicago. An international inquiry into the problem of moral training was started in London in 1906, and the report has been edited by Professor Sadler under the title, Moral Instruction and Training in Schools (London, 1908).

For the respective rights and duties of the church and the civil authority, see SCHOOLS; STATE.

———————————–

GENERAL: MONROE, Bibl. of Education (New York, 1897); HALL AND MANSFIELD, Bibl. of Educaion (Boston, 1893); CUBERLEY, Syllabus of Lectures on the Hist. of Ed. (New York, 1902). CATHOLIC WRITERS: STÖCKL, Gesch, d. Padagogik (Mainz, 1876); DRIEG, Lehrb, d. Pagagogik (Paderborn, 1900); DRANE, Christian Schools and Scholars, 2d ed, (London, 1881); KUNZ, ed., Bibliothek d. katholischem Pagagogik, a series of monographs, biographical and expository (Frieburg, 1888-); NEWMAN, The Idea of a University (London, 1873); BROTHER AZARIAS, Essays Educational (New York, 1896); WILLMAN, Didaktik als Bildungstehre, 2d ed. (Brunswick, 1894); SPALDING, Education and the Higher Life (Chicago, 1890); IDEM, Means and End of Education (Chicago, 1895); IDEM, Religion, Agnosticism and Edcuation (Chicago, 1902); DUPANLOUP, De l’éducation (Paris, 1850); IDEM, De la haute education intellectuelle (Paris, 1855-57); GAUME, Du Catholicisme dans l’éducation (Paris, 1835); IDEM, Lettres sur le paganisme dans l’éducation (Paris, 1852); KLEUTGEN, Ueber, die alten und neuen Schulen (Munster, 1869). NON-CATHOLIC WRITERS; K.A. SCHMID, Gesch. d. Erziehung (Stuggart, 1884-96); K. SCHMIDT, Gesch. d. Padagogik (Kothen, 1891); MONROE, Source Book of the Hist. of Ed. (New York, 1891); LAURIE, Historical Survey of Pre-Christian Ed. (New York, 1900); HARRIS, ed. International Educational Series (New York, 1857-); ROSENKRANZ, tr. BRACKETT, The Philosophy of Education (New York, 1905); BUTLER, The Meaning of Education (New York, 1905); SPENCER, Education (New York, 1895); BAIN, Education as a Science (New York, 1883); HORNE, The Philosophy of Education (New York, 1904).

E.A. PACE Transcribed by Beth Ste-Marie

The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VCopyright © 1909 by Robert Appleton CompanyOnline Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. KnightNihil Obstat, May 1, 1909. Remy Lafort, CensorImprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York

Fuente: Catholic Encyclopedia

Education

Chiefly in the law of God (Exo 12:26; Exo 13:8; Exo 13:14; Deu 4:5; Deu 4:9-10; Deu 6:2; Deu 6:7; Deu 6:20; Deu 11:19; Deu 11:21; Act 22:3; 2Ti 3:15). The Book of Proverbs inculcates on parents, as to their children, the duty of disciplinary instruction and training in the word of God. This was the ONE book of national education in the reformations undertaken by Jehoshaphat and Josiah (2Ch 17:7-9; 2Ch 34:30). The priests’ and Levites’ duty especially was to teach the people (2Ch 15:3; Lev 10:11; Mal 2:7; Neh 8:2; Neh 8:8-9; Neh 8:13; Jer 18:18).

The Mishna says that parents ought to teach their children some trade, and he who did not virtually taught his child to steal. The prophets, or special public authoritative teachers, were trained in schools or colleges (Amo 7:14). “Writers,” or musterers general, belonging to Zebulun, who enrolled recruits and wrote the names of those who went to war, are mentioned (Jdg 5:14). “Scribes of the host” (Jer 52:25) appear in the Assyrian bas-reliefs, writing down the various persons or objects brought to them, so that there is less exaggeration than in the Egyptian representations of battle. Seraiah was David’s scribe or secretary, and Jehoshaphat, son of Ahilud, was “recorder” or writer of chronicles, historiographer (2Sa 8:16-17); Shebun was Hezekiah’s scribe (2Ki 18:37).

The learned, according to the rabbis, were called “sons of the noble,” and took precedence at table. Boys at five years of age, says the Mishna, were to begin reading Scripture, at ten they were to begin reading the Mishna, and at thirteen years of age they were subject to the whole law (Luk 2:46); at fifteen they entered study of the Gemara. The prophetic schools included females such as Huldah (2Ki 22:14). The position and duties of females among the Jews were much higher than among other Orientals (Pro 31:10-31; Luk 8:2-3; Luk 10:38, etc.; Act 13:50; 2Ti 1:5).

Fuente: Fausset’s Bible Dictionary

EDUCATION

In early times there were no schools such as we know them today, and most children were educated at home. It was the responsibility of parents to teach their children the history and social customs of their nation, to instruct them in right living and to prepare them for adult life. This preparation involved teaching and training in reading, writing, crafts, trades and household work (Exo 13:8; Exo 13:14; Deu 4:9-10; Pro 1:8; Pro 4:1-9; Pro 31:1). In the case of Israelites, parents had a particular responsibility to teach their children the religion given them by God (Deu 6:6-9). Christian parents have a similar responsibility (Eph 6:4; 2Ti 1:5; 2Ti 3:15; see FAMILY).

People of higher social status often received a more formal education through private instructors who were appointed as the childrens guardians (2Ki 10:1; Act 7:22; Gal 3:24-25). Institutions known as wisdom schools were later established for the teaching and training of upper class people in philosophical thought (Ecc 12:9; Ecc 12:11; Jer 18:18; see WISDOM LITERATURE). Prophets also had schools for the training of their disciples (2Ki 2:3; 2Ki 4:38; Isa 8:16; see PROPHET).

For ordinary Israelites, the highest academic instruction they received was the teaching of the law of Moses. Originally the priests were the teachers, but by New Testament times the scribes had taken over most of the teaching activity (Deu 33:10; Ezr 7:6; Ezr 7:10; Neh 8:1-4; Neh 8:8; Mat 23:2-3; see SCRIBES). The power of the scribes had developed along with the establishment of places known as synagogues, which became centres of instruction for Jewish people in general (Mat 4:23; Luk 4:16-21; see SYNAGOGUE).

Jewish men could, if they wished, receive a more thorough education in the Jewish law by becoming students of learned Jewish teachers (Joh 3:10; Act 5:34; see RABBI). They usually sat at the feet of their teachers (Act 22:3), and learnt by memorizing facts and having question-and-answer sessions with their teachers (Deu 31:19; Luk 2:46). These teachers often taught in the temple (Mat 26:55; Luk 2:46; cf. Luk 19:47). (Concerning teachers in the church see TEACHER.)

In addition to education in this traditional religious setting, education in a Greek philosophical setting was also common in New Testament times. This created difficulties for Christians, because of the conflicts between values taught in this kind of education and values taught in Christian homes and churches (1Co 1:20-25; Col 2:8).

Such conflicts will always exist. Christians may consider that when a government accepts responsibility for the education of its citizens, it is fulfilling part of its God-given task. It is helping provide for societys well-being (Rom 13:4). But this does not relieve Christian parents and church leaders of their responsibilities concerning the proper instruction, development and growth of those within their care (Eph 4:13-15; Eph 6:4; 2Ti 3:14-17; Heb 5:14; Heb 13:17; see also ETHICS).

Fuente: Bridgeway Bible Dictionary

Education

EDUCATION.Among the Apocryphal Gospels fables of what befell during the Silent Years, there are some that are concerned with the school-days of Jesusmostly silly and sometimes blasphemous stories of the sort which St. Paul brands as profane and old-wifish myths (1Ti 4:7). For instance, it is told in Arab. [Note: Arabic.] Evang. Inf. xlix. that the wondrous Child one day had a dispute with His teacher about the Hebrew alphabet; and when the latter would have chastised Him, his impious arm was withered, and he died. Such stories are, of course, absolutely unhistorical; but it is indubitable that during His early years at Nazareth Jesus had to do with school and teacher. It is mentioned incidentally by St. Luke that He could read (Luk 4:16), and by St. John that He could write (Joh 8:8); and it is impossible that He should have grown up without an education. It is not the least merit of the Jewish people that they recognized the value of education, and brought it within the reach of the poorest. Our ground, says Josephus,* [Note: Apion. i. 12.] is good, and we work it to the utmost; but our chief ambition is for the education of our children. A father, according to R. Salomo, [Note: Wetsteinon 2Ti 3:15.] had as well bury his son as neglect his instruction; and it was a saying of R. Judah the Holy that the world exists by the breath of school-children.

A childs first school was his home and his first teachers his parents, in accordance with Deu 6:6-7; and his instruction began very early, since youth was recognized as the season of opportunity. He who learns as a lad, said R. Abujah, to what is he like? To ink written on fresh paper. And he who learns when old, to what is he like? To ink written on used paper. [Note: Taylor, Sayings of Fathers, iv. 27.] St. Paul testifies that Timothy had known sacred literature from his infancy ( ), his teachers beingsince his father was a Greek and apparently deceasedhis grandmother Lois and his mother Eunice (2Ti 3:15; 2Ti 1:5); and Josephus says that from the very dawn of understanding a Jewish child learned the Law by heart, and had it, as it were, engraved on his soul. [Note: Vita, 2.] It may be assumed that Joseph and Mary would be no less zealous than others in the discharge of this sacred and imperative duty.

When he reached the age of six or seven years, the boy was sent to the elementary school, which, since the subject of study was the Book of the Law, was styled the House of the Book (bth ha-Spher).|| [Note: | According to the ordinance of Joshua ben Gamla. Joshua was high priest from a.d. 63 to 65, but his ordinance was merely a reinforcement of existing requirements. Cf. Schurer, HJP ii. ii. p. 49.] This admirable institution, comparable to John Knoxs parish school, was attached to the synagogue; and since there was a synagogue in every village in the land, there was also an elementary school in every village.* [Note: Lightfoot on Mat 4:23; cf. Luk 5:17.] The establishment of this system of education was ascribed to the celebrated Simon ben Shetach, brother of Salome Alexandra, the queen of Alexander Jannaeus (b.c. 10478), and his successor on the throne (b.c. 7869). Schrer [Note: HJP ii. ii. p. 49.] summarily dismisses the tradition with the remark that this Simon ben Shetach is a meeting-place for all kinds of myths. Whatever be the worth of the tradition, Josephus reiterated ascription to Moses of the exceedingly thorough system of education which prevailed in his day, [Note: iv. viii. 12; c. Apion. ii. 25.] proves it no recent institution.

From the House of the Book such as desired to prosecute their studies and become teachers themselves passed into the Scribal College, styled the House of the Midrash (bth ha-Midrsh), [Note: The Midrash may be defined as an imaginative development of a thought or theme suggested by Scripture, especially a didactic or homiletic exposition, or an edifying religious story (Driver, LOT6 p. 529).] where the great Rabbis taught. There were several of these colleges in Palestine. Sometimes, like the Christian (cf. 1Co 16:19, Col 4:15), they met in an upper room in a private house,|| [Note: | Lightfoot on Act 1:13; Taylor, Sayings of Fathers, i. 4: Let thy house be a meeting-house for the wise.] but generally in some special place. The college at Jabne, where R. Eleasar and R. Ishmael taught, met in a place called the Vineyard. The principal college was that of Jerusalem, and it met within the Temple-precincts (cf. Luk 2:46), probably in the Temple-synagogue. The Rabbi occupied a low platform, and his disciples sat round him on the floor, powdering themselves in the dust of the feet of the wise, [Note: Taylor, Sayings of Fathers, i. 4, n. 11.] an arrangement which explains St. Pauls expression, educated at the feet of Gamaliel (Act 22:3).

The disciples were employed in the study of the Oral Lawthe Tradition of the Elders (Mat 15:2), which in those days was regarded with even greater veneration than the Written Law,** [Note: * Lightfoot on Mat 15:2.] and which until, at the earliest, the 5th cent. of our era [Note: See Margoliouth in Expositor, Dec. 1904, p. 403.] was preserved in the memories of the Rabbis and orally transmitted from generation to generation. The method of study was Mishna, i.e. repetition, [Note: The Greek term (cf. Jer. Algas. Qust. x) is a literal rendering of Mishna.] the lesson being repeated over and over again until it was fixed in the memory; and proliciency lay in faithful reproduction of the ipsissima verba of the Tradition. It was a high eulogy of Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, a disciple of R. Johanan ben Zakai, when he was likened to a plastered cistern which loses not a drop. [Note: Taylor, Sayings of Fathers, ii. 10.]

This mnemonic drill was not the sole employment in the House of the Midrash. Whatever difficulties they felt, the disciples propounded to the Rabbis for elucidation.

Often their questions were ridiculous quibbles, like that put to R. Levi ben Susi in connexion with Deu 25:9 If his brothers wife have lost her hands, how is she to loose his shoe?|||| [Note: ||| Lightfoot on Luk 2:46.] But they were not always quite so trivial. One much discussed quaestio theologicalis was, Are they few that are being saved? Some Rabbis held that all Israel would have a portion in the world to come; others, that as only two of all that came out of Egypt entered into the land of Canaan, so would it be in the days of the Messiah. [Note: Ib. on Luk 13:23.] Another question was, May a man divorce his wife for any cause? (cf. Mat 19:3). The strict school of Shammai permitted divorce only on the ground of unfaithfulness; but that of Hillel granted greater facility, allowing a man to put away his wife if he hated her; if he was dissatisfied with her cooking; if she went deaf or insane; if he saw another women whom he fancied more.*** [Note: ** Ib. on Mat 5:31.]

Not being designed for a Rabbi, Jesus never studied at any of the Scribal Colleges; but once He sat at the feet of the Rabbis in the House of the Midrash at Jerusalemon that memorable occasion when, on attaining the age of twelve years and becoming a son of the Law, He for the first time (?) accompanied Joseph and Mary on their annual pilgrimage to the sacred capital to celebrate the Feast of the Passover. He lingered in the city when His parents set forth on their return journey, and they found Him on the third day after in the school of the Rabbis. Raise up many disciples was the Rabbinical maxim,* [Note: Taylor, Sayings of Fathers, i. I.] and the new recruit would be welcome when He took His place among the disciples. He was sitting in the midst of the Teachers, both listening to them and questioning them (Luk 2:46), and evincing an intelligence which amazed them.

There prevailed in early times a singularly unhappy misconception, that the Holy Child was confounding the wise men by an exhibition of Divine wisdom. The Arab. [Note: Arabic.] Evang. Inf. (l.lii.) declares that He was puzzling them with questions about theology, astronomy, physics, metaphysics, and anatomy, things which the mind of no creature could reach; and Origen says: He was questioning the Teachers; and because they could not answer, He Himself was answering the questions which He asked. He was questioning the Teachers, not that He might learn aught, but that by questioning He might instruct them. [Note: in Luc. Hom. xviii, xix.] This is rank Docetism, and is refuted by the Evangelists testimony that Jesus made progress in wisdom and age () (Luk 2:52), as it were, pari passu. He had a human education. His mind grew even as His body.

It made Jesus an object of disdain in the eyes of the rulers that He had never attended a Rabbinical College. They called Him a Samaritan, which was a nickname that they had for one who had never sat at the feet of the Rabbis. [Note: Wetstein on Joh 8:48.] At the same time they could not deny that He had a knowledge of the things of God far transcending their theological lore. Again and again He encountered the wise men of Israel in debate, and worsted them on their own proper field (cf. Mar 12:28-34 = Mat 22:34-40; Mat 22:41-46 = Mar 12:35-37 = Luk 20:41-44). And once, when they heard Him discoursing in the Temple-court, they marvelled whence He had derived His wisdom. How, they asked, hath this man learning, though he hath not studied? (Joh 7:15). His wisdom flowed from a higher source. The lofty truths which they were blindly groping after and ignorantly reasoning about, the Father had revealed to Him (cf. Joh 5:20).

All the vaunted wisdom of the Rabbis Jesus held in very slight esteem. It was not indeed His manner to despise the searchings of earnest souls after the knowledge of God, but the theology of His day was the very arrogance of ignorance, and blinded its votaries to the truth. It is a pathetic fact that nothing so effectually prevented the recognition of Jesus by the men of Jerusalem as their fancied knowledge of the things of God. Bred in an atmosphere of disputation, they were all controversialists, and at every turn they would raise some theological objection to His claims. Once, when some wondered if He were the Messiah, others answered that His origin was known, and, according to the Rabbinical teaching, the Messiah would appear suddenly, none would know whence, like a serpent by the way or a treasure-trove (Joh 7:20-27; cf. Joh 7:41 f.). Again it was objected that He testified concerning Himself; and it was a Rabbinical maxim that a mans testimony concerning himself was invalid (Joh 8:13). [Note: Wetstein on Joh 5:31.] Thus it fared with the Messiah when He made His appeal to the men of Jerusalem. Their minds were fenced by an impenetrable barrier of theological prejudice. It was otherwise in Galilee. Among the unsophisticated folk of that despised province the gospel gained a fair hearing and a ready welcome. All the Apostles save Judas were Galiaeans. I thank thee, Father, Lord of heaven and earth, said Jesus, perhaps when He was leaving Jerusalem, rejected by her wise men (Joh 10:39-40),* [Note: and Lk. give this logion in different connexions, neither suitable (Mat 11:25-27 = Luk 10:21-22). It is probably one of the fugitive fragments which the Synoptists have preserved of the Judaean ministry. It is remarkably Johannine. Cf. Joh 3:35; Joh 13:3; Joh 1:18; Joh 6:46; Joh 6:65; Joh 10:15.] that thou didst hide these things from wise and understanding, and didst reveal them to babes (Mat 11:25).

It is important to take account of this. Does it not explain a difficulty which has been felt in connexion with the Fourth Gospel? St. John represents Jesus as a controversialist absolutely unlike the gracious Teacher of the Synoptists; and it has been alleged that these representations are incompatible. If Jesus spoke as the Synoptists report, He cannot have spoken after the Johannine fashion. But the difference is really a mark of verisimilitude. Jesus had different audiences in Galilee and in Jerusalem. To the simple people of the north He spoke the language of the heart, and couched His teaching in parable and poetry; but in Jerusalem He had to do with men whose minds were steeped in theology, and He met them on their own ground, talked to them in their own language, and encountered them with their own weapons. He adapted His teaching to His audiences. See, further, art. Boyhood.

Literature.Schrer, HJP [Note: JP History of the Jewish People.] ii. ii. p. 44 ff.; art. on Education in Hasting’s Dictionary of the Bible and in Encyc. Biblica.

David Smith.

EGG.See Animals, p. 66b.

Fuente: A Dictionary Of Christ And The Gospels

Education

EDUCATION.In the importance which they attached to the education of the young, it may fairly be claimed that the Hebrews were facile princeps among the nations of antiquity. Indeed, if the ultimate aim of education be the formation of character, the Hebrew ideals and methods will bear comparison with the best even of modern times. In character Hebrew education was predominantly, one might almost say exclusively, religious and ethical. Its fundamental principle may be expressed in the familiar words: The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge (Pro 1:7). Yet it recognized that conduct was the true test of character; in the words of Simeon, the son of Gamaliel, that not learning but doing is the chief thing.

As to the educational attainments of the Hebrews before the conquest of Canaan, it is useless to speculate. On their settlement in Canaan, however, they were brought into contact with a civilization which for two thousand years or more had been under the influence of Babylonia and in a less degree of Egypt. The language of Babylonia, with its complicated system of wedge-writing, had for long been the medium of communication not only between the rulers of the petty states of Canaan and the great powers outside its borders, but even, as we now know from Sellins discoveries at Taanach, between these rulers themselves. This implies the existence of some provision for instruction in reading and writing the difficult Babylonian script. Although in this early period such accomplishments were probably confined to a limited number of high officials and professional scribes, the incident in Gideons experience, Jdg 8:14 (where we must render with RVm [Note: Revised Version margin.] wrote down), warns us against unduly restricting the number of those able to read and write in the somewhat later period of the Judges. The more stable political conditions under the monarchy, and in particular the development of the administration and the growth of commerce under Solomon, must undoubtedly have furthered the spread of education among all classes.

Of schools and schoolmasters, however, there is no evidence till after the Exile, for the expression schools of the prophets has no Scripture warrant. Only once, indeed, is the word school to be found even in NT (Act 19:9), and then only of the lecture-room of a Greek teacher in Ephesus. The explanation of this silence is found in the fact that the Hebrew child received his education in the home, with his parents as his only instructors. Although he grew up ignorant of much that every school-boy knows to-day, he must not on that account be set down as uneducated. He had been instructed, first of all, in the truths of his ancestral religion (see Deu 6:20-25 and elsewhere); and in the ritual of the recurring festivals there was provided for him object-lessons in history and religion (Exo 12:26 f., Exo 13:8; Exo 13:14). In the traditions of his family and racesome of which are still preserved in the older parts of OThe had a unique storehouse of the highest ideals of faith and conduct, and these after all are the things that matter.

Descending the stream of history, we reach an epoch-making event in the history of education, not less than of religion, among the Jews, in the assembly convened by Ezra and Nehemiah (Neh 8:1 ff.), at which the people pledged themselves to accept the book of the law of Moses as the norm of their life in all its relations. Henceforward the Jews were pre-eminently, in Mohammeds phrase, the people of the Book. But if the Jewish community was henceforth to regulate its whole life, not according to the living word of priest and prophet, but according to the requirements of a written law, it was indispensable that provision should be made for the instruction of all classes in this law. To this practical necessity is due the origin of the synagogue (wh. see), which, from the Jewish point of view, was essentially a meeting-place for religious instruction, and, indeed, is expressly so named by Philo. In NT also the preacher or expounder in the synagogue is invariably said to teach (Mat 4:23, Mar 1:21, and passim), and the education of youth continues to the last to be associated with the synagogue (see below). The situation created by this new zeal for the Law has been admirably described by Wellhausen: The Bible became the spelling-book, the community a school. Piety and education were inseparable; whoever could not read was no true Jew. We may say that in this way were created the beginnings of popular education.

This new educational movement was under the guidance of a body of students and teachers of the Law known as the Spherim (lit. book-men) or scribes, of whom Ezra is the typical example (Ezr 7:6). Alongside these, if not identical with them, as many hold, we find an influential class of religious and moral teachers, known as the Sages or the Wise, whose activity culminates in the century preceding the fall of the Persian empire (b.c. 430330). The arguments for the identity in all important respects of the early scribes and the sages are given by the present writer in Hastings DB [Note: Dictionary of the Bible.] i. 648; but even if the two classes were originally distinct, there can be no doubt that by the time of Jesus hen Sira, the author of Ecclesiasticus (cir. b.c. 180170), himself a scribe and the last of the sages, they had become merged in one.

To appreciate the religious and ethical teaching of the sages, we have only to open the Book of Proverbs. Here life is pictured as a discipline, the Hebrew word for which is found thirty times in this book. The whole of life, it has been said, is here considered from the view-point of a pdagogic institution. God educates men, and men educate each other (O. Holtzmann).

With the coming of the Greeks a new educational force in the shape of Hellenistic culture entered Palestinea force which made itself felt in many directions in the pre-Maccabean age. From a reference in Josephus (Ant. XII. iv. 6) it may be inferred that schools on the Greek model had been established in Jerusalem itself before b.c. 220. It was somewhere in this period, too, that the preacher could say: Of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh (Ecc 12:12)reflexions which necessarily presuppose a wide-spread interest in intellectual pursuits. The edict of Antiochus Epiphanes at a later date (1Ma 1:57) equally implies a considerable circulation of the Torah among the people, with the ability to profit by its study.

Passing now, as this brief sketch requires, to the period of Jewish history that lies between the triumph of the Maccabees and the end of the Jewish State in a.d. 70, we find a traditionthere is no valid reason for rejecting it as untrustworthywhich illustrates the extent to which elementary education, at least, was fostered under the later Maccabean princes. A famous scribe of the period (cir. b.c. 75), Simon ben-Shetach, brother of Queen Alexandra, is said to have got a law passed ordaining that the children shall attend the elementary school. This we understand on various grounds to mean, not that these schools were first instituted, but that attendance at them was henceforth to be compulsory. The elementary school, termed the house of the Book (i.e. Scripture), in opposition to the house of study or college of the scribes (see below), was always closely associated with the synagogue. In the smaller places, indeed, the same building served for both.

The elementary teachers, as we may call them, formed the lowest rank in the powerful guild of the scribes. They are the doctors (lit. teachers) of the law, who, in our Lords day, were to be found in every village of Galilee and Juda (Luk 5:17 RV [Note: Revised Version.] ), and who figure so frequently in the Gospels. Attendance at the elementary school began at the age of six. Already the boy had learned to repeat the Shema (Hear, O Israel, etc., Deu 6:4), selected proverbs and verses from the Psalms. He now began to learn to read. His only textbooks were the rolls of the sacred Scriptures, especially the roll of the Law, the opening chapters of Leviticus being usually the first to be taken in hand. After the letters were mastered, the teacher copied a verse which the child had already learned by heart, and taught him to identify the individual words. The chief feature of the teaching was learning by rote, and that audibly, for the Jewish teachers were thorough believers in the Latin maxim, repetitio mater studiorum. The pupils sat on the floor at the teachers feet, as did Saul at the feet of Gamaliel (Act 22:3).

The subjects taught were the three R [Note: Redactor.] sreading, writing, and arithmetic, the last in a very elementary form. The childs first attempts at writing were probably done, as in the Greek schools of the period, on sherds of pottery; from these he would be promoted to a wax tablet (Luk 1:63 RV [Note: Revised Version.] ), on which he wrote with a pointed style or metal instrument, very much as if one wrote on thickly buttered bread with a small stiletto. Only after considerable progress had been made would he finally reach the dignity of papyrus.

For the mass of young Jews of the male sex, for whom alone public provision was made, the girls being still restricted to the tuition of the home, the teaching of the primary school sufficed. Those, however, who wished to be themselves teachers, or otherwise to devote themselves to the professional study of the Law, passed on to the higher schools or colleges above mentioned. At the beginning of our era the two most important of these colleges were taught by the famous doctors of the law, Hillel and Shammai. It was a grandson of the former, Gamaliel I., who, thirty years later, numbered Saul of Tarsus among his students (Act 22:3). In the Beth hammidrash (house of study) the exclusive subjects of study were the interpretation of the OT, and the art of applying the regulations of the Torah, by means of certain exegetical canons, to the minutest details of the life of the time.

A. R. S. Kennedy.

Fuente: Hastings’ Dictionary of the Bible

Education

ed-u-kashun:

I.Education Defined

II.Education in Early Israel

1.Nomadic and Agricultural Periods

2.The Monarchical Period

3.Deuteronomic Legislation

4.Reading and Writing

III.Education in Later Israel

1.Educational Significance of the Prophets

2.The Book of the Law

3.Wise Men or Sages

4.The Book of Proverbs

5.Scribes and Levites

6.Greek and Roman Influences

IV.Education in New Testament Times

1.Subject Matter of Instruction

2.Method and Aims

3.Valuable Results of Jewish Education

4.The Preminence of Jesus as a Teacher

5.Educational Work of the Early Disciples

Literature

I. Education Defined

By education we understand the sum total of those processes whereby society transmits from one generation to the next its accumulated social, intellectual and religious experience and heritage. In part these processes are informal and incidental, arising from participation in certain forms of social life and activity which exist on their own account and not for the sake of their educative influence upon the rising generation. The more formal educative processes are designed (1) to give the immature members of society a mastery over the symbols and technique of civilization, including language (reading and writing), the arts, the sciences, and religion, and (2) to enlarge the fund of individual and community knowledge beyond the measure furnished by the direct activities of the immediate environment (compare Dewey, article on Education in Monroe’s CE; compare Butler, ME).

Religious education among ancient and modern peoples alike reveals clearly this twofold aspect of all education. On its informal side it consists in the transmission of religious ideas and experience by means of the reciprocal processes of imitation and example; each generation, by actually participating in the religious activities and ceremonies of the social group, imbibing as it were the spirit and ideals of the preceding generation as these are modified by the particular economic and industrial conditions under which the entire process takes place. Formal religious education begins with the conscious and systematic effort on the part of the mature members of a social group (tribe, nation, or religious fellowship) to initiate the immature members by means of solemn rites and ceremonies, or patient training, or both, into the mysteries and high privileges of their own religious fellowship and experience. As regards both the content and form of this instruction, these will in every case be determined by the type and stage of civilization reflected in the life, occupations, habits and customs of the people. Among primitive races educational method is simpler and the content of formal instruction less differentiated than on higher culture levels (Ames, PRE). All education is at first religious in the sense that religious motives and ideas predominate in the educational efforts of all primitive peoples. The degree to which religion continues preminent in the educational system of a progressive nation depends upon the vitality of its religion and upon the measure of efficiency and success with which from the first that religion is instilled into the very bone and sinew of each succeeding generation. Here lies the explanation of the religious-educational character of Hebrew national life, and here, too, the secret of Israel’s incomparable influence upon the religious and educational development of the world. The religion of Israel was a vital religion and it was a teaching religion (Kent, GTJC).

II. Education in Early Israel

In their social and national development the Hebrews passed through several clearly marked cultural stages which it is important to note in connection with their educational history. At the earliest point at which the Old Testament gives us any knowledge of them, they, like their ancestors, were nomads and shepherds. Their chief interest centered in the flocks and herds from which they gained a livelihood, and in the simple, useful arts that seem gradually to have become hereditary in certain families. With the settlement of the Hebrew tribes in Palestine and their closer contact with Canaanitish culture, a more established agricultural life with resulting changes in social and religious institutions gradually superseded the nomadic stage of culture. A permanent dwelling-place made possible, as the continual warfare of gradual conquest made necessary, a closer federation of the tribes, which ultimately resulted in the establishment of the monarchy under David (W. R. Smith, RS; Davidson, HE).

1. Nomadic and Agricultural Periods

In these earliest cultural periods, both the nomadic and the agricultural, there was no distinct separation between the spheres of religion and ordinary life. The relation of the people to Yahweh was conceived by them in simple fashion as involving on their part the obligation of filial obedience and loyalty, and on Yahweh’s part reciprocal parental care over them as His people. The family was the social unit and its head the person in whom centered also religious authority and leadership, The tribal head or patriarch in turn combined in himself the functions which later were differentiated into those of priest and prophet and king. Education was a matter of purely domestic interest and concern. The home was the only school and the parents the only teachers. But there was real instruction, all of which, moreover, was given in a spirit of devout religious earnestness and of reverence for the common religious ceremonies and beliefs, no matter whether the subject of instruction was the simple task of husbandry or of some useful art, or whether it was the sacred history and traditions of the tribe, or the actual performance of its religious rites. According to Josephus (Ant., IV, viii, 12) Moses himself had commanded, All boys shall learn the most important parts of the law since such knowledge is most valuable and the source of happiness; and again he commanded (Apion, II, 25) to teach them the rudiments of learning (reading and writing) together with the laws and deeds of the ancestors, in order that they might not transgress or seem ignorant of the laws of their ancestors, but rather emulate their example. Certain it is that the earliest legislation, including the Decalogue, emphasized parental authority and their claim on the reverence of their children: Honor thy father and thy mother, that thy days may be long in the land which Yahweh thy God giveth thee (Exo 20:12); And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death. And he that curseth his father or his mother, shall surely be put to death (Exo 21:15, Exo 21:17); while every father was exhorted to explain to his son the origin and significance of the great Passover ceremony with its feast of unleavened bread: And thou shalt tell thy son in that day, saying, It is because of that which Yahweh did for me when I came forth out of Egypt (Exo 13:8).

2. The Monarchical Period

The period of conquest and settlement developed leaders who not only led the allied tribes in battle, but served as judges between their people, and were active in the maintenance of the ancestral religion. In time, sufficient coperation was obtained to make possible the organization of strong intertribal leagues and, finally, the kingship. This increasing political unification, says Ames, was accompanied by a religious consciousness which became ultimately the most remarkable product of the national development (Ames, PRE, 174 f). The establishment of the kingdom and the beginnings of city and commercial life were accompanied by more radical cultural changes, including the differentiation of religious from other social institutions, the organization of the priesthood, and the rise and development of prophecy. Elijah, the Tishbite, Amos, the herdsman from Tekoa, Isaiah, the son of Amoz, were all champions of a simple faith and ancient religious ideals as over against the worldly-wise diplomacy and sensuous idolatry of the surrounding nations. Under the monarchy also a new religious symbolism developed. Yahweh was thought of as a king in whose hands actually lay the supreme guidance of the state: Accordingly the organization of the state included provision for consulting His will and obtaining His direction in all weighty matters (W. R. Smith, RS, 30). Under the teaching of the prophets the ideal of personal and civic righteousness was moved to the very forefront of Hebrew religious thought, while the prophetic ideal of the future was that of a time when the earth shall be full of the knowledge of Yahweh, as the waters cover the sea (Isa 11:9), when all from the least of them unto the greatest of them shall know him (Jer 31:34). Concerning the so-called schools of the prophets which, in the days of Elijah, existed at Bethel, Jericho and Gilgal (2Ki 2:3, 2Ki 2:1; 2Ki 4:38 f), and probably in other places, it should be noted that these were associations or brotherhoods established for the purpose of mutual edification rather than education. The Bible does not use the word schools to designate these fraternities. Nevertheless, we cannot conceive of the element of religious training as being entirely absent.

3. Deuteronomic Legislation

Shortly before the Babylonian captivity King Josiah gave official recognition and sanction to the teachings of the prophets, while the Deuteronomic legislation of the same period strongly emphasized the responsibility of parents for the religious and moral instruction and training of their children. Concerning the words of the law Israel is admonished: Thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thy house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up (Deu 6:7; Deu 11:19). For the benefit of children as well as adults the law was to be written upon the door-posts and gates (Deu 6:9; Deu 11:20), and very plainly upon great stones set up for this purpose upon the hilltops and beside the altars (Deu 27:1-8). From the Deuteronomic period forward, religious training to the Jew became the synonym of education, while the word Torah, which originally denoted simply Law (Exo 24:12; Lev 7:1; Lev 26:46), came to mean religious instruction or teaching, in which sense it is used in Deu 4:44; Deu 5:1, This is the law which Moses set before the children of Israel:… Hear, O Israel, the statutes and the ordinances which I speak in your ears this day, that ye may learn them, and observe to do them; and in Pro 6:23,

For the commandment is a lamp; and the law is light;

And reproofs of instruction are the way of life.

(Compare Psa 19:8; Pro 3:1; Pro 4:2.)

4. Reading and Writing

With the development and reorganization of the ritual, priests and Levites, as the guardians of the law, were the principal instructors of the people, while parents remained in charge of the training of the children. In families of the aristocracy the place of the parents was sometimes taken by tutors, as appears from the case of the infant Solomon, whose training stems to have been entrusted to the prophet Nathan (2Sa 12:25). There is no way of determining to what extent the common people were able to read and write. Our judgment that these rudiments of formal education in the modern sense were not restricted to the higher classes is based upon such passages as Isa 29:11, Isa 29:12, which distinguishes between the man who is learned (literally, knoweth letters) and the one who is not learned, and Isa 10:19, referring to the ability of a child to write, taken together with such facts as that the literary prophets Amos and Micah sprang from the ranks of the common people, and that the workman who excavated the tunnel from the Virgin’s Spring to the Pool of Siloam carved in the rock the manner of their work (Kennedy in HDB). It should be added that the later Jewish tradition reflected in the Talmud, Targum and Midrash, and which represents both public, elementary and college education as highly developed even in patriarchal times, is generally regarded as altogether untrustworthy.

III. Education in Later Israel

The national disaster that befell the Hebrew people in the downfall of Jerusalem and the Babylonian captivity was not without its compensating, purifying and stimulating influence upon the religious and educational development of the nation. Under the pressure of adverse external circumstances the only source of comfort for the exiled people was in the law and covenant of Yahweh, while the shattering of all hope of immediate national greatness turned the thought and attention of the religious leaders away from the present toward the future. Two types of Messianic expectation characterized the religious development of the exilic period. The first is the priestly, material hope of return and restoration reflected in the prophecies of Ezekiel. The exiled tribes are to return again to Jerusalem; the temple is to be restored, its ritual and worship purified and exalted, the priestly ordinance and service elaborated. The second is the spiritualized and idealized Messianic expectation of the Second Isaiah, based on teachings of the earlier prophets. For the greatest of Hebrew prophets Yahweh is the only God, and the God of all nations as well as of Israel. For him Israel is Yahweh’s servant, His instrument for revealing Himself to other nations, who, when they witness the redemption of Yahweh’s suffering Servant, will bow down to Yahweh and acknowledge His rule. Thus the trials of the nation lead to a comprehensive universalism within which the suffering Israel gains an elevated and ennobling explanation (Ames, PRE, 185). In the prophetic vision of Ezekiel we must seek the inspiration for the later development of Jewish ritual, as well as the basis of those eschatological hopes and expectations which find their fuller expression in the apocalypse of Daniel and the kindred literature of the later centuries. The prophecies of the Isaiahs and the Messianic hope which these kindled in the hearts of the faithful prepared the way for the teachings of Jesus concerning a Divine spiritual kingdom, based upon the personal, ethical character of the individual and the mutual, spiritual fellowship of believers.

1. Educational Significance of the Prophets

The educational significance of the prophetic writings of this as of the preceding periods is that the prophets themselves were the real religious leaders and representative men (Kulturtrger) of the nation. In advance of their age they were the heralds of Divine truth; the watchmen on the mountain tops whose clear insight into the future detected the significant elements in the social and religious conditions and tendencies about them, and whose keen intellect and lofty faith grasped the eternal principles which are the basis of all individual and national integrity and worth. These truths and principles they impressed upon the consciousness of their own and succeeding generations, thereby giving to future teachers of their race the essence of their message, and preparing the way for the larger and fuller interpretation of religion and life contained in the teachings of Jesus. The immediate influence of their teaching is explained in part by the variety and effectiveness of their teaching method, their marvelous simplicity and directness of speech, their dramatic emphasis upon essentials and their intelligent appreciation of social conditions and problems about them.

2. The Book of the Law

The immediate bond of union, as well as the textbook and program of religious instruction, during the period of the captivity and subsequently, was the Book of the Law, which the exiles carried with them to Babylon. When in 458 bc a company of exiles returned to Palestine, they along with their poorer brethren who had not been carried away, restored the Jewish community at Jerusalem, and under the suzerainty of Persia, founded a new nationalism, based, even more than had been the earlier monarchy, upon the theocratic conception of Israel’s relation to Yahweh. During this period it was that writings of poets, lawgivers, prophets and sages were brought together into one sacred collection of scrolls, known later as the Old Testament canon, of which the Torah (the law) was educationally the most significant. The recognized teachers of this period included, in addition to the priests and Levites, the wise men, or sages and the scribes or sopherm (literally, those learned in Scriptures).

3. Wise Men or Sages

Whether or not the sages and scribes of the later post-exilic times are to be regarded as one and the same class, as an increasing number of scholars are inclined to believe, or thought of as distinct classes, the wise men clearly antedate, not only the sopherm but in all probability all forms of book learning as well. Suggestions of their existence and function are met with in earliest times both in Israel and among other nations of the East. As illustrations of their appearance in prexilic Old Testament history may be cited the references in 2 Sam 14:1-20; 1Ki 4:32; Isa 29:10. It is no lesser personage than King Solomon who, both by his contemporaries and later generations as well, was regarded as the greatest representative of this earlier group of teachers who uttered their wisdom in the form of clever, epigrammatic proverbs and shrewd sayings. The climax of Wisdom-teaching belongs, however, to the later post-exilic period. Of the wise men of this later day an excellent description is preserved for us in the Book of Ecclesiasticus (39:3, 4, 8, 10; compare 1:1-11):

He seeks out the hidden meaning of proverbs,

And is conversant with the subtleties of parables,

He serves among great men,

And appears before him who rules;

He travels through the land of strange nations;

For he hath tried good things and evil among men.

He shows forth the instruction which he has been taught,

And glories in the law of the covenant of the Lord.

Nations shall declare his wisdom,

And the congregation shall tell out his praise.

4. The Book of Proverbs

Of the pedagogic experience, wisdom and learning of these sages, the Book of Proverbs forms the Biblical repository. Aside from the Torah it is thus the oldest handbook of education. The wise men conceive of life itself as a discipline. Parents are the natural instructors of their children:

My son, hear the instruction of thy father,

And forsake not the law of thy mother. – Pro 1:8.

(Compare Pro 4:1-4; Pro 6:20; Pro 13:1.) The substance of such parental teaching is to be the ‘fear of Yahweh’ which is the beginning of wisdom; and fidelity in the performance of this parental obligation has the promise of success:

Train up a child in the way he should go,

And even when he is old he will not depart from it. – Pro 22:6.

In their training of children, parents are to observe sternness, not hesitating to apply the rod of correction, when needed (compare Pro 23:13, Pro 23:14), yet doing so with discretion, since wise reproof is better than a hundred stripes (Pro 17:10). Following the home training there is provision for further instruction at the hands of professional teachers for all who would really obtain unto wisdom and who can afford the time and expense of such special training. The teachers are none other than the wise men or sages whose words heard in quiet (Ecc 9:17) are as goads, and as nails well fastened (Ecc 12:11). Their precepts teach diligence Prov (Pro 6:6-11), chastity (Pro 7:5), charity (Pro 14:21), truthfulness (Pro 17:7) and temperance (Pro 21:17; Pro 23:20, Pro 23:21, Pro 23:29-35); for the aim of all Wisdom-teaching is none other than

To give prudence to the simple,

To the young man knowledge and discretion:

That the wise man may hear, and increase in learning;

And that the man of understanding may attain unto sound counsels. – Pro 1:4, Pro 1:5.

5. Scribes and Levites

The sopherm or men of book learning were editors and interpreters as well as scribes or copyists of ancient and current writings. As a class they did not become prominent until the wise men, as such, stepped into the background, nor until the exigencies of the situation demanded more teachers and teaching than the ranks of priests and Levites, charged with increasing ritualistic duties, could supply. Ezra was both a priest and a sopher (Ezr 7:11; Neh 8:1 f), concerning whom we read that he set his heart to seek the law of Yahweh, and to do it, and to teach in Israel statutes and ordinances (Ezr 7:10). Likewise the Levites often appear as teachers of the law, and we must think of the development of sopherism (scribism) as a distinct profession as proceeding very gradually. The same is true of the characteristic Jewish religious-educational institution, the synagogue, the origin and development of which fell within this same general period (compare SYNAGOGUE). The pupils of the sopherm were the Pharisees (perushm or separatists) who during the Maccabean period came to be distinguished from the priestly party or Sadducees.

6. Greek and Roman Influences

The conquest of Persia by Alexander (332 bc) marks the rise of Greek influence in Palestine. Alexander himself visited Palestine and perhaps Jerusalem (Josephus, Ant, X, i, 8), befriended the Jews and granted to them the privilege of seir-government, and the maintenance of their own social and religious customs, both at home and in Alexandria, the new center of Greek learning, in the founding of which many Jews participated (see ALEXANDRIA). During the succeeding dynasty of the Ptolemies, Greek ideas and Greek culture penetrated to the very heart of Judaism at Jerusalem, and threatened the overthrow of Jewish social and religious institutions. The Maccabean revolt under Antiochus Epiphanes (174-164 bc) and the re-establishment of a purified temple ritual during the early part of the Maccabean period (161-63 bc) were the natural reaction against the attempt of the Seleucids forcibly to substitute the Greek gymnasium and theater for the Jewish synagogue and temple (Felten, NZ, I, 83 f; compare 1 Macc 1, 3, 9, 13 and 2 Macc 4-10). The end of the Maccabean period found Phariseeism and strict Jewish orthodoxy in the ascendancy with such Hellenic tendencies as had found permanent lodgment in Judaism reflected in the agnosticism of the aristocratic Sadducees. The establishment of Roman authority in Palestine (63 bc) introduced a new determining element into the environmental conditions under which Judaism was to attain its final distinguishing characteristics. The genius of the Romans was practical, legalistic and institutional. As organizers and administrators they were preminent. But their religion never inspired to any exalted view of life, and education to them meant always merely a preparation for life’s practical duties. Hence, the influence of Roman authority upon Judaism was favorable to the development of a narrow individualistic Phariseeism, rather than to the fostering of Greek idealism and universalism. With the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans a little more than a century later (70 ad) and the cessation of the temple worship, the Sadducees as a class disappeared from Judaism, which has ever since been represented by the Pharisees devoted to the study of the law. Outside of Jerusalem and Palestine, meanwhile, the Jewish communities at Alexandria and elsewhere were much more hospitable to Greek culture and learning, at the same time exerting a reciprocal, modifying influence upon Greek thought. It was, however, through its influence upon early Christian theology and education that the Hellenistic philosophy of the Alexandrian school left its deeper impress upon the substance and method of later Christian education.

IV. Education in New Testament Times

Elementary schools: Jewish education in the time of Christ was of the orthodox traditional type and in the hands of scribes, Pharisees and learned rabbis. The home was still the chief institution for the dispensation of elementary instruction, although synagogues, with attached schools for the young were to be found in every important Jewish community. Public elementary schools, other than those connected with the synagogues were of slower growth and do not seem to have been common until, some time after Joshua ben Gamala, high priest from 63-65 ad, ordered that teachers be appointed in every province and city to instruct children having attained the age of 6-7 years. In the synagogue schools the hazzan, or attendant, not infrequently served as schoolmaster (compare SCHOOL; SCHOOLMASTER).

1. Subject Matter of Instruction

As in earlier times the Torah, connoting now the sacred Old Testament writings as a whole, though with emphasis still upon the law, furnished the subject-matter of instruction. To this were added, in the secondary schools (colleges) of the rabbis, the illustrative and parabolical rabbinical interpretation of the law (the haggadhah) and its application to daily life in the form of concise precept or rule of conduct (the halakhah). Together the haggadhah and halakhah furnish the content of the Talmud (or Talmuds), as the voluminous collections of orthodox Jewish teachings of later centuries came to be known.

2. Method and Aims

As regards teaching method the scribes and rabbis of New Testament times did not improve much upon the practice of the sopherm and sages of earlier centuries. Memorization, the exact reproduction by the pupil of the master’s teaching, rather than general knowledge or culture, was the main objective. Since the voice of prophecy had become silent and the canon of revealed truth was considered closed, the intellectual mastery and interpretation of this sacred revelation of the past was the only aim that education on its intellectual side could have. On its practical side it sought, as formerly, the inculcation of habits of strict ritualistic observance, obedience to the letter of the law as a condition of association and fellowship with the selected company of true Israelites to which scribes and Pharisees considered themselves to belong. The success with which the teachings of the scribes and rabbis were accompanied is an evidence of their devotion to their work, and more still of the psychological insight manifested by them in utilizing every subtle means and method for securing and holding the attention of their pupils, and making their memories the trained and obedient servants of an educational ideal. The defects in their work were largely the defects in that ideal. Their theory and philosophy of education were narrow. Their eyes were turned too much to the past rather than the present and future. They failed to distinguish clearly the gold from the dross in their inherited teachings, or to adapt these to the vital urgent needs of the common people. In its struggle against foreign cults and foreign culture, Judaism had encased itself in a shell of stereotyped orthodoxy, the attempt to adapt which to new conditions and to a constantly changing social order resulted in an insincere and shallow casuistry of which the fantastic conglomerate mass of Talmudic wisdom of the 4th and 6th centuries is the lasting memorial.

3. Valuable Results of Jewish Education

Nevertheless, Jewish education, though defective both in matter and in method, and tending to fetter rather than to free the mind, achieved four valuable results: (1) it developed a taste for close, critical study; (2) it sharpened the wits, even to the point of perversity; (3) it encouraged a reverence for law and produced desirable social conduct; and (4) it formed a powerful bond of union among the Jewish people. To these four points of excellence enumerated by Davidson (Historia Ecclesiastica, 80) must be added a fifth which, briefly stated, is this: (5) Jewish education by its consistent teaching of lofty monotheism, and its emphasis, sometimes incidental add sometimes outstanding, upon righteousness and holiness of life as a condition of participation in a future Messianic kingdom, prepared the way for the Christian view of God and the world, set forth in its original distinctness of outline and incomparable simplicity in the teachings of Jesus.

4. The Preminence of Jesus as a Teacher

Jesus was more than a teacher; but He was a teacher first. To His contemporaries he appeared as a Jewish rabbi of exceptional influence and popularity. He used the teaching methods of the rabbis; gathered about Him, as did they, a group of chosen disciples (learners) whom He trained and taught more explicitly with a view to perpetuating through them His own influence and work. His followers called Him Rabbi and Master, and the scribes and Pharisees conceded His popularity and power. He taught, as did the rabbis of His time, in the temple courts, in the synagogue, in private, and on the public highway as the exigencies of the case demanded. His textbook, so far as He used any, was the same as theirs; His form of speech (parable and connected discourse), manner of life and methods of instruction were theirs. Yet into His message and method He put a new note of authority that challenged attention and inspired confidence. Breaking with the traditions of the past He substituted for devotion to the letter of the law an interest in men, with boundless sympathy for their misfortune, abiding faith in their worth and high destiny and earnest solicitude for their regeneration and perfection. To say that Jesus was the world’s greatest and foremost example as a teacher is to state a fact borne out by every inquiry, test and comparison that modern educational science can apply to the work and influence of its great creative geniuses of the past. Where His contemporaries and even His own followers saw only as in a glass, darkly, He saw clearly; and His view of God and the world, of human life and human destiny, has come down through the ages as a Divine revelation vouchsafed the world in Him. Viewed from the intellectual side, it was the life philosophy of Jesus that made His teachings imperishable; esthetically it was the compassionate tenderness and solicitude of His message that drew the multitudes to Him; judged from the standpoint of will, it was the example of His life, its purpose, its purity, its helpfulness, that caused men to follow Him; and tested by its immediate and lasting social influence, it was the doctrine, the ideal and example of the human brotherliness and Divine sonship, that made Jesus the pattern of the great teachers of mankind in every age and generation. With a keen, penetrating insight into the ultimate meaning of life, He reached out, as it were, over the conflicting opinions of men and the mingling social and cultural currents of His time backward to the fundamental truths uttered by the ancient prophets of His race and forward to the ultimate goal of the race. Then with simple directness of speech He addressed Himself to the consciences and wills of men, setting before them the ideal of the higher life, and with infinite patience sought to lift them to the plane of fellowship with Himself in thought and action.

5. Educational Work of the Early Disciples

It remained for the disciples of Jesus to perpetuate His teaching ministry and to organize the new forces making for human betterment. In this work, which was distinctly religious-educational in character, some found a field of labor among their own Jewish kinsmen, and others, like Paul, among the needy Gentiles (Gal 1:16; Gal 2:7; 1Ti 2:7). As regards a division of labor in the apostolic church, we read of apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers ( 1Co 12:28; Eph 4:11). The apostles were the itinerant leaders and missionaries of the entire church. Their work was largely that of teaching, Paul insisting on calling himself a teacher as well as an apostle (2Ti 1:11; 1Co 4:17). The prophets were men with a special message like that of Agabus (Act 21:10, Act 21:11). The evangelists were itinerant preachers, as was Philip (Act 8:40), while the pastors, also called bishops, had permanent charge of individual churches. The professional teachers included both laymen and those ordained by the laying on of hands. Their work was regarded with highest honor in the church and community. In contrast with the itinerant church officers, apostles and evangelists, they, like the pastors, resided permanently in local communities. With this class the author of the Epistle of Jas identifies himself, and there can be little doubt that the epistle which he wrote reflects both the content and form of the instruction which these earliest Christian teachers gave to their pupils. Before the close of the 1st century the religious educational work of the church had been organized into a more systematic form, out of which there developed gradually the catechumenate of the early post-apostolic period (see CATECHIST). In the Didache, or Teachings of the Apostles, there has been reserved for us a textbook of religious instruction from this earlier period (Kent, GTJC). Necessarily, the entire missionary and evangelistic work of the apostolic church was educational in character, and throughout this earliest period of church history we must think of the work of apostles, evangelists and pastors, as well as that of professional teachers, as including a certain amount of systematic religious instruction. See further Pedagogy; SCHOOL; TEACHER; TUTOR.

Literature

Ames, Psychology of Religious Experience, chapter x; Box, article Education, in Encyclopedia Biblica; Butler, The Meaning of Education; Davidson, History of Education; Dewey, article Education, in Monroe’s Cyclopedia of Education; Edersheim, The Upbringing of Jewish Children, in SJSL, and Life and Times of Jesus, I, 225 f; Fairweather, Background of the Gospels; Felten, Schriftgelehrten, Synagogen u. Schulen, in Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte, I; Ginsburg, article Education, in Kitto’s Biblical Cyclopedia; Hiegemoser u. Bock, Quellenbuch u. berblick d. Geschichte d. Pdagogik; Katzer, articles Jesus als Lehrer and Judenchristenturn, in Rein’s Encyklopdisches Handbuch d. Pdagogik; Kennedy, article Education, in HDB, I; Kohler and Gudemann, article Education in Jewish Encyclopedia, V; Kent, Great Teachers of Judaism and Christianity and Makers and Teachers of Judaism; Laurie, Historical Survey of Pre-Christian Education; Lewit, Darstellung d. theoretischen u. praktischen Pdagogik im jd. Altertume; Oehler, article Pdagogik d. Alten Testaments, in Schmid’s Encyclopdie d. Gesammten Erziehungs-u. Unterrichtswesen; Schrer, Schriftgelehrsamkeit, Schule u. Synagoge, in Geschichte d. jd. Volkes (ed 1907); W. R. Smith, Religion of the Semites; Straussburger, Geschichte d. Unterrichts bei d. Israeliten; von Rohden, article Katechetik in Rein’s EHP.

Fuente: International Standard Bible Encyclopedia

Education

See Instruction; Teachers; School

Instruction; Teachers; School

Fuente: Nave’s Topical Bible

Education

Education. There is little trace among the Hebrews in earlier times of education in any other subjects than the law. The wisdom, therefore, and instruction, of which so much is said in the book of Proverbs, are to be understood chiefly of moral and religious discipline, imparted, according to the direction of the law, by the teaching and under the example of parents.

(But Solomon himself wrote treatises on several scientific subjects, which must have been studied in those days). In later times, the prophecies and comments on them, as well as on the earlier Scriptures, together with other subjects, were studied. Parents were required to teach their children some trade.

(Girls also went to schools, and women generally among the Jews were treated with greater equality to men than in any other ancient nation). Previous to the captivity, the chief depositaries of learning were the schools or colleges, from which in most cases proceeded that succession of public teachers who at various times endeavored to reform the moral and religious conduct of both rulers and people. Besides the prophetical schools, instruction was given by the priests in the Temple and elsewhere. See Schools.

Fuente: Smith’s Bible Dictionary