« AnteriorContinuar »
world towards the active professors of religion, must be aware, that in no respect is their halting more eagerly watched for, than in respect of their ordinary duties, and that the triumph is counted quite decisive, when some flaw or defect in these can be associated with high religious pretensions, or great religious activity. It was the last resort of the enemies of Daniel to make a direct attack upon his religion ; they would a thousand times rather have fought the battle against him on other ground; but his blameless life and finely balanced integrity of character left them no alternative. Human nature is ever the same; and we may be very sure, that opponents of the truth will not venture on a direct attack on a man's religion, so long as they can find the semblance of occasion for a different mode of charge.
Not less obvious is the duty of carefully avoiding those vices which are regarded as specially mean and obnoxious by men of the world, and encouraging the development of whatever, on just grounds, is counted by them noble and praiseworthy. Fallen though man is, he is yet not insensible to the beauty and glory of certain terrestrial virtues, nor does his heart fail to recoil with disgust from the exhibition, at least in others,—of a corresponding class of vices. He may, perhaps, be unable to see the beam in his own eye, but he is very quicksighted in detecting the mote in his brother's, especially if that brother lead such a life, or make such a profession, as casts a censure upon him. Different colours can be rendered most conspicuous on certain corresponding or contrasting grounds; certainly it is on the ground of a religious profession, that greed, meanness, selfishness, and all that class of vices, stand out blackest and most repulsive. A weapon of no contemptible power would be fairly wrenched out of the hands of the scoffer, if the character of all who make a profession of religion stood out before the world, not only unspotted by any of these blemishes, but adorned and fortified by all the corresponding excellences.
Lastly, we take the liberty of adding the suggestion, that no kind of cultivation, which may fit him, with God's blessing, for higher usefulness, should be held beneath the notice, or beyond the endeavours of the Christian minister. We have seen how frequently, when it is wished to hold up the character of a minister of religion to ridicule, he is represented as coarse, vulgar, and uncouth-stigmatised, in mind, manners, and habits, as utterly unfit for cultivated society. It is clearly impossible for some, who have no opportunities of mixing in the higher circles, where, almost exclusively, the cultivation of manners is prosecuted, to attain the grace and elegance of those who move constantly in that sphere; and it were simply ridiculous
to a sim; and in usually com
Coleridge, Persons of onse there a
in any one, so circumstanced, to mimic what he cannot naturally attain. But refinement of mind, which is within the compass of all, usually carries with it a certain refinement of manner; and in any case, where refinement of mind is joined to a simple and unaffected manner, there can be no just cause of offence, among persons of sense and reason. It was a remark of Coleridge, that he never knew a genuine lover of the Bible who was a vulgar man. Making due allowance for local and national peculiarities, it is certain that the great heroes of the Bible were very remarkable for refinement both of mind and manner. Some worthy persons may affect to despise these remarks, and may tell us, that wherever the great qualifications for the Christian ministry exist, such things as we are now adverting to are utterly insignificant. In one sense we grant it. Surpassing excellence in any department will cover a multitude of defects; the burning eloquence of Chalmers covered all the faults of his composition, pronunciation, and manner. In the words of Foster, a superlatively strong sense will indeed command attention, and even admiration, in the absence of all the graces, and notwithstanding much incorrectness or clumsiness in the workmanship of the composition. But when thus standing the divested and sole excellence, it must be pre-eminently conspicuous to have this power.”* Nothing can be more true. A man of extraordinary devotedness, or of genuine eloquence, will not have much less influence, in any rank of society, because his pronunciation is broad, or his manners uncouth. But it is dangerous for those who have no such shining gift to suppose that similar defects in them will be equally harmless. It becomes them to remember, that (according to the same author), “a disgusting cup will spoil the purest element which can be conveyed in it, though that were the nectar of immortality.”
ART. IV.-1. Zur Gymnasialreform, Theoretisches und Prak
tisches, von Dr H. KOECHLY. Dresden und Leipzig, 1846. 2. Die genetische Methode des schulmässigen Unterrichts. Von
Dr MAGER. Dritte Bearbeitung. Zürich, 1846. 3. Das Privatstudiun in seiner pædagogischen Bedeutung.
Eine Skizze als Beitrag zur Kritik unsrer heutigen Gymnasien. Von Dr M. SEYFFERT. Brandenburg, 1852.
* Essay on the Aversion of Men of Taste to Evangelical Religion,
4. Das Schulwesen im protestantischen Staate. Von Dr F. J.
GUNTHER. Elberfeld, 1852. 5. Alte und neue Bildung mit Bezug auf das höhere Schulwesen.
Von WILHELM SCHEELE. Elbing, 1852.
In placing the titles of these works at the head of our article, we do not intend to review them, nor even to give an analysis of their contents. They are to serve as an index of the nature of our remarks; they are to tell the eye as it glances over these pages-Here is something on education-education in the German gymnasia ; and then to invite or deter the reader, as his interest may dictate. At the same time, they have a right to their place as being among the most important of recent publications on this subject, which is considerably agitated in Germany. Never, perhaps, at any previous period of the history of German civilization and religion, were the minds of its most earnest men in such a ferment in regard to the all-important question of the best means of educating the young, as at present. The storm of their late revolutionary and reactionary periods has just passed away; the shattered fragments of some parts of their social and political fabric have either been removed out of sight, or they have once more, with great pains, been fixed in their old positions; the smoke and dust have dispersed, the earth has ceased to rock beneath men's feet, and they look wondering about. Foremost among the bewildered faces we recognise those of the educators of the age, almost at their wit's end from fright and disappointment; they at first look at each other significantly, then they whisper, and finally you distinguish their louder voices. “Those were our pupils,” they say, “those were our pupils that stirred up all this noise; those were our pupils that carried on these regicide proceedings; those were our pupils that made the sky ring with the hated terms of Socialism, Communism, and Red Republic;—and those were our pupils, too, that made such fools of themselves and such a laughing-stock of their country at St Paul's, in Frankfort.”
The late events have opened their eyes to some enormous defects, either in their methods of teaching, or in their political institutions, or else in both, which, it is true, had been pointed out to them before, but which never assumed that distinct and actual character which tangible effects now press upon their attention. They feel that something is wanting in their national existence to which none of their previously applied means, meant to be preventives, had sufficient reference. Any one but a German perceives at a glance what this is. When he sees a man of brilliant parts lecture for six weeks on the accentuation of a Greek noun of the first declension, his thoughts are, “However great the learning this may require, however much research and ingenuity it may manifest, what is the accentuation of a Greek noun to the great interests and the loud calls of the race of mankind ? Must the brightest talents of one of the noblest nations thus evaporate in artificial, selfcreated regions of inquiry?".
But what is the German to do? His is not the frivolity and facile vivacity of the Gaul, nor the “common-sense" utilitarianism and bread-and-butter philosophy of the Briton, nor the dolce far niente worship and Madonna devotion of his Southern neighbour; but his is a mind bequeathed to him from ancestors who routed Varus’ legions, who were proud to give their vote in the Witenagemot, or who-conceived grotesque gods for their Walhalla. These are the characteristics of his mind still: a genuine love of liberty, a meddling, active, bustling spirit, and a fancy doting on the obscure and lonely, the wild and weird, delighting to roam in a region out of space and out of time. Take away from him his public life, forbid him to cherish patriotic (not merely loyal) emotions, repress his feelings of true manliness, the Roman virtus, so that he should feel that
“ There is a bondage worse, far worse, to bear
Their fetters in their souls ; " and he will, nay, he must, turn to the realms of mere thought, and construct wild philosophies, build fanciful theories, and invent impracticable systems. What if the arts, what if learning flourish? “When the æsthetic element represses other and these essential interests, when its cultivation is carried so far that it tends to alienate men from these interests, then it is always connected with much insipidity and sloth, with much self-complacency, with an aimless craving for diversion, and a morbid desire for mere pleasure. Ever to look and to listen, to enjoy and to criticise, becomes ultimately a hollow, effemi. nate, sybaritic life, which tends to destroy even the noblest powers.”* And as to learning, it is undeniable that the Germans have done much for it; “ but it is not good when a nation which possesses every element of progress and advancement, is confined to an exclusively literary existence." + It is not good for philosophy, as without practical application it must run into mere theorising; it is not good for practical life, for the agárrei does not belong to the man who can exert the native powers of his understanding only on nature as distinct from man, or only on the dead life of the past, and who can look at the acting men of the present age only from a distance, and know them only from hearsay. Where the ideal and the real are thus divorced, there the development and advancement of life cannot go on in a healthful manner.
* Rosenkranz, Leben Hegels, p. 349.
+ This is the motto which a wonderfully cleareighted German theologian (Hun. deshagen), places on the titlepage of a work which, although it appeared before the late German commotions, said some very true things on this subject. Its title is, “Der deutsche Protestantismus, seine Vergangenheit und seine hentigen Lebensfragen beleuchtet von einem deutschen Theologen." Frankfurt am Main. 1847. 8vo, pp. 539.
It is not strange, therefore, that the Germans should have partitioned off the subject of education also into so and so many categories, vacant shelves, which are there, whether any thing is to be placed on them or not; and it is owing to this among other reasons that their books on this subject are so little readable. We can often neither appreciate nor understand them, first, because we are not sufficiently conversant with the spirit that dictated them, the circumstances that called them forth, and the necessities they are intended to supply; and secondly, because they are so immeasurably in advance of us in the mere theoretical development of their system. Terms that seem to be to them the veriest household words, are to us as unintelligible as the terms Holoptychius, Cricodus, Schilfglaserz, or the opecculated species of the dioptea and raphoneis oregonica would be to some geognostic Epimenides, who should awake on one of these days.
If we open any one of the books mentioned at the beginning of this article, we shall find such systems as Basedow's, Pestalozzi's, Jacotot’s, Hamilton's, Rudhardt's, and such methods as the deictic, the acroamatic, the mnemonio, the heuristic, the socratic, the catechetic, the eclectic, the genetic,* the calculating, and others, bandied about with a freedom that convinces us at once that what is Greek to us is their vernacular. An endless refining of the theory, not of the art, of teaching, has produced all these designations: they are afraid, it seems, to let nature do her work; all is artificial, and their motto appears to be the German poet's epigram:
“ Nature hid from childhood's eyes and ears,
Methodless, confusing it appears." + The mind of every reader, probably, who considers all these
* The genetic method requires perhaps a more serious word. It is advocated by some of the ablest teachers of Germany. Dr Mager, the editor of an excellent educational journal, Die Pedagogische Revue, has been labouring for its ascendency for many years. Herbart has been trying to introduce it in metaphysical investigations. In its application to education it is defined by one of its advocates in the following language: _“Geneticam methodum eam dicimus instituendi aut docendi rationem, qua res naturali suo ordine et ita exponuntur, ut a simplicioribus ad composita, a causa ad effectum, a minori ad majus, a faciliori ad difficilius pergatur, singulorum tamen momentorum apte inter se conjungendorum diligentissima habita ratione."- (Lindner, De finibus et praesidiis artis pædagogicæ secundum principia doctrinæ Christianæ, P. 29.)
+ " Vor der Natur verbind dem Kinde Aug' und Ohr,
Verwirrend stellt sie sich ihm immethodisch vor,"