(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "[untitled] The Harvard Theological Review, (1919-04-01), pages 233-235"

STOP 



Early Journal Content on JSTOR, Free to Anyone in the World 

This article is one of nearly 500,000 scholarly works digitized and made freely available to everyone in 
the world byJSTOR. 

Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other 
writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the 
mid-seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries. 

We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this 
resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non-commercial 
purposes. 

Read more about Early Journal Content at http://about.istor.org/participate-istor/individuals/early- 
journal-content . 



JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people 
discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching 
platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit 
organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please 
contact support@jstor.org. 



BOOK REVIEWS 233 

Beugious Education and American Democracy. Walter Scott 
Athearn. The Pilgrim Press. 1917. Pp. xiii, 394. $1.50. 

"The problem of the book," says the author, "is the organization 
of religious education in the American democracy" (p. viii). To 
quote the author again, what he gives us is a "blue print to guide 
future development" (p. 17). If the term "big business" may be 
used in a eulogistic rather than dyslogistic sense, we are here sum- 
moned to big business in religious education as contrasted with the 
wasteful and ineffective methods of small-shop denominationalism. 
It is possible. Professor Athearn beUeves, so to organize a system of 
coordinated public schools and church schools as to "guarantee to 
every child both intelligence and godliness" (p. 21). In almost 
every detail of this ambitious scheme there is reflected a lively, 
bustling, adventurous, unconventional, pungent mind. 

The outstanding requirements of the proposed re-organization 
may be summarily stated as follows: 

(1) It must be entirely separate from the schools of the State — 
a second complete school system. 

(2) In addition to denominational agencies it must include organs, 
both local and national, that are directly representative of the 
populace as a whole, and therefore free from denominational con- 
trol. The author holds strenuously to the opinion that any mere 
federation of denominational organs or agencies or representatives 
would subject the common good to partisan interests. 

(3) It must be comprehensive, must reach all the way from the 
kindergarten to the university. In particular, teacher-training will 
be provided on the high-school level, the college level, and the gradu- 
ate-college level. 

(4) It must provide professional supervision capable of reaching 
every local community, and available for any church school that 
desires it. 

(5) It must develop methods of its own by direct research of an 
experimental sort, particularly with respect to "prejudice," senti- 
ment, and ideals, an area of the mind to which public-school methods 
have given Kttle attention. 

(6) It must establish and maintain standards that will enable it 
to deal with the public-school system, in all matters that require 
coordination therewith, "on terms of absolute equality" (p. 107). 

(7) If one asks where and how such an elaborate organization is 
to be started, the answer is that a start has been made already in 
certain community-schools or systems of religious education, notably 
the one at Maiden, Mass., of which Professor Athearn himself is the 



234 HARVARD THEOLOGICAL REVIEW 

head. Such schools, it is believed, could easily be multiplied, and 
a next natural step would be a general federation or union of them. 
Moreover, certain existing organizations that are not under ec- 
clesiastical control might be woven into the new fabric. The Re- 
Kgious Education Association is adapted to serve as the professional 
association of the leaders of rehgious education. The International 
Sunday School Association might possibly be reconstructed so as to 
serve as a general supervisory and promotional body. Even the 
American Sunday School Union might have a part. 

Let no one ignore this scheme on the ground that it is too am- 
bitious to be practical, or even that it is fundamentally defective. 
For we need to face, not to run away from, the problem that Profes- 
sor Atheam has attacked so vigorously. Religious education in this 
country, as far as organization is concerned, is too nearly chaotic to 
be creditable to the American mind. The drastic analysis of this 
situation in Chapter IV has not been printed a day too soon. Es- 
pecial attention may be caUed to his summary on page 239, a sum- 
mary of duplications, confusions, and expenses, all of which must be 
regarded, ultimately, as burdens that the children have to bear. 

His fundamental contentions are likely to arouse doubt at one 
point at least. Is the creation of still another set of religious organ- 
izations — organizations that are expected to include the members 
of all the churches — is this the shortest road to eflBciency? If we 
had to deal with a new element of population, or with a new function, 
possibly a new set of organs would be best; but no such reason is 
alleged. Further, some essential questions with regard to the pro- 
posed new bodies are touched upon all too Hghtly. There must be 
within them. Professor Atheam reiterates, "absolute academic free- 
dom" (p. 154 f.). Just what "absolute" academic freedom means 
is not clear; certainly the universities claim nothing of the kind for 
themselves. On the other hand, the community-system of re- 
ligious education is to be controlled by persons "of the most profound 
religious experience" (p. 155). One wonders how this item of 
administration is to be managed, particularly in a system of "abso- 
lute academic freedom." One wonders too whether references to 
what the churches "must" do (pp. 151, 168), and to "granting" 
to each denomination the "right" to supervise its own religious 
schools (p. 240), are to be taken as instances of a careless use of 
language merely or as signs of a state of mind. In relation to this 
delicate matter one thing is clear in any case: Professor Athearn's 
assumption that the members of the various religious denominations 
can actually be induced to enter the proposed non-ecclesiastical 



BOOK REVIEWS 235 

religious organizations is a marked tribute to the growth of liberality 
within the churches. 

Another point on which too little has been said concerns the re- 
lation of Jews and Catholics to a religious enterprise that essays 
to represent the community and the nation. Every detail reads as 
if the scheme were Protestant- The chapter on "the unification of 
educational agencies" does not even mention a Catholic or Jewish 
agency. The Maiden system, which furnishes a model, is, in actual 
operation, as Professor Athearn indicated at the 1918 Conference of 
the Rehgious Education Association, an active coQperation of Prot- 
estants, with passive acquiescence or non-participation on the part 
of CathoUcs and Jews. 

A grateful word must be spoken with respect to the general plan 
of the book, particularly its classified bibhographical Usts and its 
method of raising more questions than it pretends to answer. On 
the other hand, the typography of the bibliographical notes is 
about the worst possible, and there are signs of haste.' The dis- 
cussion of the principles of curriculum building, in particular, offers 
suggestions and headings without taking time or space to indicate 
clearly what theory of the educative process the author has in mind. 

George A. Cob, 

Union Theological Seminabt. 



Pbotestantism in Gebmant. Kesr D. Macmillan. Princeton Uni- 
versity Press. 1917. Pp. viii, «82. $1.50. 

In one sense these lectures belong to the large and rapidly growing 
class of "tracts for the times" produced by the great war; yet in 
another sense they constitute a historical essay of independent 
interest and value, such as might be written at any time. The 
author is President of Wells College, and the lectures were delivered 
on the Stone foundation at Princeton Theological Seminary in the 
year 1916-17. They aim to trace the course of Grerman Protestantism 

^I venture to catalogue the following: P. 3, "average level of . . . intelligence" 
and "average citizen" obviously do not state the author's meaning; p. 12 confuses 
moral training with teaching ethics; p. 42, "References on Reconstruction of Edu- 
cational Theory Due to the World War" are listed under the general heading, "The 
Parochial Schools"; pp. 148, 224, "McMurry" is misspelled; p. 148, data "is"; 
pp. 180, 181, the phrase "association of church schools" is used to designate an 
entirely non-denominational body; p. 199, lines 8-9, "International" is an inter- 
polation and an incorrect interpretation; p. 220, what is meant by "the present 
graded curriculum"?