The Pedagogy of the New Testament

CAROLINE SHELDON, MILLS COLLege, caliFORNIA

'S it not more than a little strange that, with all our searchings after light upon psychologically correct methods of teaching, it seems never to have occurred to anyone to make use of the four Gospels

or any part of them as a text-book in pedagogy? We speak habitually of Jesus of Nazareth as a great teacher; we recognize the fact that the titles "Rabbi," "Rabboni," given him by his followers and others meant simply "teacher,' just the name by which those of us who have had the privilege of teaching for a longer or shorter period in a country school have been called by, over and over again; yet it never seems to occur to us to study the stories of his life or to recommend them to others as a source of knowledge of right ways of putting pupils into living relation with the facts and principles with which we wish them to become acquainted.

If we examine the works of the great writers on educational subjects, we shall find that when they have had something valuable to give to the world they have either been groping more or less blindly after the principles by which Jesus taught, or have, like Peter, been following him "afar off."

Socrates was a great teacher, and his method of imparting knowledge and stimulating thought by means of questions has long been studied as a model; but compare his most searching questions, even in the Phaedo or the Cisto, with that of the Man of Galilee addressed to the lawyer, or the series addressed to the disciples regarding his own identity. When the latter passage came in the order of the Sunday school lessons a few weeks ago I asked my class, "Why did Jesus ask first, 'Who do men say that I am?' instead of the other question, Whom say ye that I am?" "

There was a moment's silence and then a thoughtful girl ventured, "Wasn't that the natural order? When we are asked a thing like that we're very apt to try to think what the general

opinion is instead of really giving our own. It seems to me that Jesus cleared the ground for his other question by asking that first, and having all those vague notions disposed of before he gave them the really important question."

Is it not true that his questions do follow the natural and logical order always, and that he never allows the men and women with whom he is speaking to dodge the vital issue, their own beliefs and duties; but pins everyone of them down to straightforward, honest thinking upon his own needs?

Then there was another excellent principle that used to be much emphasized when I was a student in the normal school, but which, judging from the helplessness in matters intellectual of a large proportion of the students that come to us from the grammar and secondary schools of the country, must now be held in abeyance, "Do not tell your pupils too much: get them to do their own thinking." When the lawyer asked, "Who is my neighbor?" and Jesus answered with the parable of the Good Samaritan, doubtless the lawyer exercised himself with some very serious thinking. He certainly was not allowed to go away remembering the story and forgetting the application.

It would be interesting to note the number of times that Jesus. met an inquiry with another question, thereby causing the inquirer to think out his own answer. It is not after all surprising that the twelve Galileans went out to change the philosophy of the western world, and its entire outlook upon life after a three years' training under such a teacher.

But

Rousseau taught "the return to nature," the throwing aside of conventions, the treating every child as an individual. all these things Jesus had taught long before and infinitely better than they have ever been taught since. He spoke to the thousands, but he never lost sight of the individual. He never cared what had been said "by them of old time," but always for the eternal verities, the hidden realities of life and things.

What teacher has ever made such free use as he of the objective method and of teaching from objects? This, too, without any elaborate paraphernalia or intricate apparatus; he took the thing at hand, the salt thrown into the village highway, the birds of the air, the grain of mustard seed, the sycamine

tree, the lilies of the field, the glow of sunrise or sunset, the winds, the mountains, the rain. Here too was nature study.

Throughout the three brief years of his ministry we find that he was developing and training the powers of his followers. "Virtue makes many warm friends but she never takes pupils," says "the Garret Philosopher," and perhaps in the methods of Christ with his disciples we may find a solution of the muchvexed question "Shall we teach ethics and morality in the schools; and, if so, how?" May I be permitted to say here, parenthetically, that no real teacher can help teaching them, and the most valuable part of her instruction is incidental. So it was with Jesus. He awakened the desire to know these things and then gave the needed help, rarely by direct precept, more often by question, parable, or object lesson, as on that occasion when he set a little child in the midst of them."

Study the great teachers," we are told. By all means; study Comenius, Pestalozzi, Froebel, the Oratorians, the Jesuits, the Jansenists, Thomas Arnold, and Horace Mann; but in our study let us not neglect the greatest of them all. The New Testament, especially in the gospels, has stored up vast wealth, spiritual, literary, philosophical, much of it unused, unnoticed. Why not, in all our searching after right ways of teaching, study more closely, from a purely pedagogical standpoint, the methods of the greatest of all teachers? Possibly less study of the New Testament as a collection of texts fitted to prove certain doctrines, and more careful seeking for the spirit and ways of working of its central figure, would go a long way toward remedying certain much-discussed faults of the Sunday school.

Editorial

D

AY by day in the ordinary intercourse of the home parents are laying the foundations of the children's characters. In many homes little thought is given to the matter. Life moves on and records its lessons, and somehow the boys and girls turn into men and women. But in this realm, as truly as in our fields and gardens, careful cultivation produces marked effects, improving the quality of the product and greatly enhancing its value. Nowhere does it pay better to put thought and painstaking care into our work than in the bringing up of children. It is a pity that in so many cases there is merely a haphazard attention to this most important of all human interests.

In previous editorial paragraphs we have spoken of LOVE, AUTHORITY, and SYMPATHY as fundamentals in an ideal home. We wish to speak briefly now of the importance of TRAINING VERSUS COMPULSION in the education of the children. It is often easier to lay an absolute command upon the child than to lead him step by step to the point where he can see the subject in its true aspect, and make an intelligent choice for himself. But the latter method is manifestly the better one for the child. It develops his faculties, and prepares him for the time, which will come so soon at the longest, when he will not have his parents at hand to make his choices for him. Placing a measure of responsibility upon children at an early age, and gradually increasing it until practically all the matters affecting their personal life are referred to them for settlement, is the way to have trustworthy children, and to make them grow up into a noble manhood and womanhood. A child can be quietly influenced to choose the right course when compulsion would immediately prejudice him against it, and incline him toward the wrong. For instance, the matter of going to school may be put in such a light that for months before school age arrives the young child will be full of an ambitious desire to begin his school days; or a bugbear can be made of it until nothing but absolute compulsion will ever induce him to go, and no amount of that even will make him like it. A grave mistake is often made by parents in this matter. Again, many children have been forever prejudiced against church-going by being obliged to go instead of being taught to choose it as a privilege. Nothing should be enforced as a punishment which ought to be chosen as a duty and a pleasure. A child can easily be trained to prefer cleanliness to filth, work to idleness, use

fulness and companionableness at home to waste of time and vagrancy upon the street. It is useless to force a young man to go to college against his will; but if a college education for his son is an object of desire on the part of the parent, it is easy so to train the mind of the maturing child that he will choose it for himself without ever knowing that it was long before thoughtfully chosen for him. The principle runs through the whole of home life, and has innumerable applications.

A

Ta recent meeting of the American Social Science Association there were some very helpful utterances by several distinguished educators on the subject of adult education. President Eliot spoke of the general nature of the problem of making modern educational influences reach the mature portion of the population, so that the great sums invested in public schools, colleges and universities shall accomplish the most good for the whole people. Dr. Melvil Dewey of the State Library at Albany, N. Y., spoke of the ministry of books, especially of public collections of books. Men grow strong and great by using the knowledge and power that has been developed by those who have preceded them. Books make these stores available. It is the duty of the State to put these sources of information and inspiration within reach of all. Dr. Henry M. Leipziger spoke of public lecture courses as one of the most effective means of general culture. Dr. Leipziger is supervisor of the lectures which have become an essential part of New York's educational system. He referred to the marvelous development of popular education in the past thirty years. In our large cities to the school has been added the evening schools, the vacation schools, and the opening of the schoolhouses evenings for recreation, instruction and social intercourse. This extension of the influence of the school to persons above school age is one of the real advances of modern education. The question whether the education furnished by the State shall stop with the university has been answered rightly in the negative. Men need knowledge not only as a means of livelihood, but as a means of life. During last season in New York there were 143 places where systematic courses of lectures were given, and 1,134,000 people listened to the 4,665 lectures which were offered. Free public lectures given at the schoolhouses have become an integral part of New York's educational system, and the movement is rapidly spreading in other parts of the country.

At the same meeting Dr. Hermon C. Bumpus, Director of the American Museum of Natural History in New York, spoke of the