TEACHING CHILDREN WHAT THEY DO NOT UNDERSTAND.

It is not uncommon to hear persons declaim against teaching children

what they do not understand. If by this is meant that children should

not learn a set of words as parrots do, merely by the ear, and without

attaching any idea to what they utter, no one will dissent from the

propriety of the rule. But if the meaning is that they should learn

nothing except what they fully comprehend, the rule certainly needs to

be hedged in by some grave precautions.

There are indeed few things which any one, the oldest or the wisest,

fully comprehends. Who knows what matter is? Certainly not the most

eminent of philosophers. They do not pretend to know. We pick up a

pebble. Who can tell what it is, absolutely? We say that it is something

which has certain qualities. But even these we know mainly by negations.

The pebble is hard, that is, it does _not_ yield to pressure. It is

opaque, that is, it does _not_ transmit light. It is heavy, that is, it

does _not_ remain still, but goes towards the centre of the earth unless

intercepted by some interposing body.

Who knows the meaning, absolutely, of a single article of the Creed?

Certainly not the most eminent of divines. We know certain things about

the great mysteries of the Godhead, and even these things we know, not

directly, but by certain faint, distant analogies, and we express our

knowledge in terms chosen mainly from Scripture and arranged with care

by wise and learned men. These venerable formularies, containing the

most exact verbal expression which the Church has been able to frame, of

what the Scriptures teach about God and his ways, we commit to memory,

and we repeat them with comfort and edification. But we do not pretend

to penetrate the very essence of their meaning. Who by searching can

find out God? One must be God himself to understand him.

We read that Christ was tempted of the devil in the wilderness. There

are many things in this transaction which we may be said, in a certain

sense, to know. But a man will not proceed far in analyzing this

knowledge before he will discover that there are mysteries underlying

the whole, which he cannot penetrate. He knows some of the surface

relations. But the things themselves, in their essence, are unknown. Was

Christ tempted, as the devil tempts us, by suggesting thoughts in the

mind? Was the devil present in a bodily shape? Did he utter an audible

voice, by undulating the air, as we do? Has he direct relations to

matter, as we have? How could his offer of worldly power and riches be

any real temptation to the Saviour, when Jesus knew that Satan had no

power to make his offer good?

There are indeed few things, in revelation or out of revelation, in mind

or in matter, which we really and fully comprehend. If, therefore, we

are to teach children nothing but what they understand, we must either

teach them nothing at all, or our rule must be materially qualified. No

one knows absolutely but God. Among created beings, there are almost

infinite gradations of intelligence, although the highest created

intelligence begins its range infinitely below that of the Divine mind.

A given formula of words, therefore, may express very different degrees

of truth according to the degree of intelligence of the party using it.

A catechism or a creed may convey twenty different degrees of meaning to

twenty successive persons, varying in age, character, and culture. Yet

the very youngest and feeblest shall understand something of its

meaning, while the wisest and oldest shall not have exhausted it. The

young and feeble intellect, receiving a formula of truth with suitable

explanations of its terms, takes in at once a portion of its meaning and

gradually grows into a fuller comprehension of what it has received. A

statement of doctrine received by a child at the age of five, conveys to

him a few feeble rays of light. The same statement at the age of ten,

means to him far more than it did before, while at twenty it is all

luminous with knowledge.

The mind itself grows and expands, and with every addition to its own

vigor and stature, does it find new truths in those expressive and

pregnant formulas of doctrine with which it has from childhood been

familiar. It is like looking at a material object, first with the naked

eye, and then with glasses of continually increased magnifying power.

The more we increase the power, the more we see in the same bit of

matter. Yet no glass will ever reveal to us the very interior essence of

even the smallest particle of dust. God only knows fully either any

single thing or the sum of things. Because, however, we cannot see into

the essence of a pebble or a grain of sand, shall we shut our eyes to it

altogether? Shall we not look at it, first as an infant does, then as a

child, then as a youth, then as a man, then as a philosopher? We can

never see it as God does. But we shall see it with ever-growing powers

of vision, until that which was to us at first only a rude mass becomes

an exhaustless organized microcosm of wonders.

I do not advocate the overloading of children with verbal statements of

abstruse doctrines, whether of religion or of science. Much less would I

turn them into parrots, to repeat phrases to which they attach no

meaning at all. But when it is demanded, on the other hand, that they

shall learn nothing but what they understand, I demur. I ask for

explanation of the rule. I insist that, every statement of truth which

they learn, even the most elementary, contains depths which neither they

nor their teachers can fathom. I insist that, both in science and

religion, there are certain great, admitted elementary truths, reduced

to forms of sound words with which the whole world is familiar; and that

while these formularies contain many things which a child cannot

understand, they yet contain many things of which even the youngest

child has a fair comprehension. I insist that a carefully prepared

religious creed or catechism, even though it contains many things beyond

a child's present comprehension, is a fit subject for study. Memory in

childhood is quick and tenacious. The treasures first laid away in that

great storehouse are the last to be removed. They may be overlaid by

subsequent accumulations, but they are still ready for use. Forms of

sound words are certainly among the things which parents and teachers

should store away in the young minds of which they have charge. If the

child does not understand all that he thus places in his memory, he

understands portions of it just as he sees certain qualities of the

pebble which he holds in his hand, and he will see and understand more,

as his mind expands and his powers of spiritual vision increase.

In the School-Room: Chapters in the Philosophy of Education · 第 21 / 94 题