Education a Christian Duty.
By Sidney Brownsberger
The strongest argument against general education is advanced by some of the friends of monarchical government. It is founded upon the apprehension that education will lift the lower classes above their sphere in life, and make them dissatisfied with their station. This very thing which they fear is the object that education is to serve in the world, especially among its degraded classes. We want them to become dissatisfied with their degrading ignorance and soul-debasing habits, and take a higher seat in the moral, intellectual, and business world. This is the end for which many nations are laboring at the present day. Many States of our own country are attempting a compulsory education of their citizens. No less than eleven of our States and one of the territories (Arizona) have passed laws compelling parents to send their children to school during a specified number of years. These laws are based upon the principle of self-protection, and are, therefore, just and right. Nothing in reality renders legitimate governments so insecure as extreme ignorance in the people. The State reasons as follows: “Ignorance in a republic is a crime against the State, and should be punished as well as prevented. A child is entirely dependent upon his parents. He has a right to his life, clothing, and food. If his parents should deny him any of these, the State would interfere for his protection. He also has a right to some kind of training which will enable him to live after he passes from the control of his parents. In this country a free education is offered him; and as education is continually improving in quality and is becoming more universal, without it he will be at a great disadvantage in the struggle of life. Therefore he has a right to demand that his parents shall not deprive him of it, either before or after he is old enough to appreciate its value. But if his parents should do so, some higher power should interfere in his behalf.” And what is true of a State is true of the church and family. Ignorance breeds corruption. It is the most productive soil for prejudices and false alarms. No doubt the devil finds entrance into humble churches through the door of ignorance more frequently than through any other. Still there are thousands of professed Christians in the church, and perhaps there has been a corresponding number during all its history, who believe that mental culture, derived from a close study of books or nature, forms no part of Christian duty. They would neglect the development of the purely intellectual faculties as unimportant, while they would recommend a thorough development of the moral powers. If this avowed opinion were really based upon an error of judgment, with the motive still pure, a course of argument might suffice to convince them of their error; but there is no doubt that many of these are influenced almost wholly by selfish considerations. Not having the perseverance, the stamina, and the natural taste to undertake and complete the difficult work of obtaining an education, these persons must find some apology for their own ignorance and that of their children in depreciating the value of mental culture. Some are absorbed in the desire for money-making, providing temporal comforts, and administering to physical wants. These argue that they can make as much money without an education as with one, perhaps even more. With this saying they console their defrauded children. Argument will never molest such, unless it be of a purely selfish character. But the other class, who act from pure, though mistaken motives, may be led to correct views by appeals to reason and revelation. Though the Bible is not a scientific treatise, even of morals and religion, it, nevertheless, embodies all the principles that may be taken as the basis of a complete and systematic treatise on the cultivation and development of man. The fact that the Omniscient God himself dictated this book for the alleged purpose of instructing man in all right-doing, that he may be thoroughly furnished unto all good works, is in itself sufficient evidence that no principle has been left out of the Bible that has any bearing upon the duty of man, though the development of these principles, the particulars in matters of conduct, and, in some things, the manner and time of doing, are all left to the judgment and discretion of man himself. In some way or other, whether by inference, precept, or by the example of men whose conduct has honorable mention in the Bible, the finger of God’s word points man to a perfect development of body and mind and moral principles. All the history of the church shows, beyond a doubt, that God is trying to lead men upward, step by step, to an heirship with his Son, and finally to a perfection no less in its sphere than that of God himself. Some ignorant yet honest people suppose that the Son of God did not favor education because, 1. It was said of him that he had never learned his letters; 2. He chose those as his disciples who were afterward called unlearned and ignorant; 3. He treated with contempt the doctors of the law, and others, who professed such profound wisdom and knowledge. Answer: 1. Christ had no need to be taught of men, for his knowledge as the Son of God far surpassed that of any mortal. Though he had never learned his letters, as was alleged, he no doubt read better than any of the doctors. 2. He chose these fishermen, not because he despised learning, but to avoid error. The fact that he afterward chose Paul, a very learned man, as an apostle after the doctrine was fully established and attested, and the manner of making the choice, is sufficient proof of the truth of this assertion. The learned were, in all probability, steeped in the popular errors of the day, and these he treated with contempt. He sought minds untrammeled by the doctrines of man, which he would educate as only the Son of God could do. These he drilled three years in his school before he dared send them forth, a longer period than most of our young men, right from the farm, are willing to spend in close application to study before entering upon their vocation. 3. It was not the knowledge of the doctors which he despised, but their errors and insufferable conceit, their hypocrisy and deception of the people. Moreover, every reference in the Bible to true mental culture and knowledge is made with respect and approval. But some are ready to assert that this wisdom and knowledge and understanding referred to in the Bible has to do only with a knowledge and understanding of moral duty. This assertion seems to carry with it the appearance of truth, inasmuch as man’s greatest errors arose from his moral degeneracy and ignorance, and, consequently, to correct this evil, more prominence is given to the instruction in morality and religious knowledge than to that pertaining to the general culture. The parable of the talents is sufficiently broad to cover all that man has received from his Creator,—moral, mental, and physical capacities. If he does not improve these to the best of his ability, he will be held responsible to his God. The excuse for neglecting opportunities for self-culture on the plea of fear that one would fare worse for the improvement of his talents, or that he has so few that it will hardly pay, or that he regards it wholly unnecessary, will not make him innocent before Him whose hired servant he is. God will never condemn a man because he is poor, for riches are a snare, and, exposed to fire, flood, or sword, often take wings and fly away; but true riches, which consist in the proper cultivation of the mind and the faculties of the soul, are permanent, and, if increased by proper using, will prove a sure anchor of the soul forever.