With the development of educational thought, it is necessary, albeit very briefly, understand its current position. In Christianity, there are always two things: 1) Christianity is the doctrine of this life, and 2) Christianity is the doctrine of eternal life. The most important problem of Christianity - the problem of salvation - appears in this life, and in addition, Christianity represents a revelation given over not to somehow get through this life, but with love to carry your life cross. This explains the fact that Christianity has given an unprecedented flowering of human cultural forces in all areas: art, science, social environment, and family - everything was subjected to the fertilized action of Christianity. Christianity itself was a blessing of life, not going away from it. It was life-changing, but it was worth the unprecedented labor. Thus, Christianity is the doctrine of life.
However, on the other hand, Christianity, as the doctrine of eternal life, separates us from the ordinary life. The doctrine of the kingdom of God inside us is easily combined with the first theme, and Christians, loving this life without anguish, leave it when the time comes (Arthur, Gearon & Sears, 2010). In essence, the combination of both is not difficult, but in the historical development, these two motives are almost always instead of synthesis entered into the competition, developing, getting isolated from one another, and those created in the life of incompleteness and one-sidedness.
The meaning of education is to develop and strengthen the force in the soul of a child; it is necessary to liberate the soul from the passions, to help the child to disclose the image of God in him. Christianity dominates the world, but does not go away from it and considers it as honor to fight for the good of the world against the evil. The same is the highest meaning of monasticism and even asceticism. However, these two objectives may differ psychologically, especially in education - for raised in a Christian spirit for life on earth and at the same time to bring up the move to eternal life is not very easy. In early Christianity dominated eschatological setting, feeling close to the end of history - so it is easy to children lit the flame burning in the heart elders. But it was a thirst for eternal life, and not rush to the transformation of everyday life.
Now especially, of course, it is difficult to create a Christian education. We cannot develop either the first or the second motive of Christianity. The reason for this is, without a doubt that the school cannot be out of life ahead of it. If our lives are not arranged in a Christian way, or rather, imbued with anti-Christian principles, it is natural that education is not a substitute for life, being a part of it (Walls, 2011). There is only where education is supported in life itself, it can play a role - if it does not, it is unlikely that education will bring fruitfulness. In the first centuries of Christianity, people with their lives caused in children the mood that the latter excited the love of God, and education is the natural evolution of life itself.
You cannot raise a child, keeping him out of life, isolating (as was the utopia of Rousseau). Raising a child is not only a mother or father - but all the fullness of life plays a role, and the problem of Christian education will be resolved easily if there will be islands of Christian culture. From these general considerations, let us move on to some historical data (Lawson & Silver, 2013).
In the early Christian era, Christianity, in fact, did not know the problems of education. Children themselves were attached to what was important for parents; of course, that children often share their fate. Once Christianity turned in the normal conditions of life (after the cessation of persecution), the influence of the Christian environment weakens, and the problem of Christian education stands in full force. In this respect, it is curious that the mother of St. Augustine was powerless to influence her son to his conversion.
However, Christian spirit penetrated a little into the practice of teaching, which was more influenced by the Old Testament. Severe motives of pedagogy in the Old Testament played for a long time, and even to this day play a role. For example, the rule is often quoted in the Christian pedagogy: "Do not play with your child, if you do not want him as an adult to distress you."
Of course, it was useful to the early period of European history, but it is far from us. Christian teaching morality should not have too much to rely on these Old Testament motifs. This is true even with respect to such exceptional books like Psalms; and it has truly Christian motives, but there is much that needs to be learned in the spirit of the New Testament. Through Christian pedagogy inevitably had to pass severe Old Testament motifs, but they had to be transformed so that brings the world of the Gospel. Since this was not enough, they will inevitably distort the problem of raising a child, because they do not breathe all the power of the Christian understanding of the human soul. A similar judgment has to be made as to how Christianity adopted pedagogical ideas and practices of paganism (Werner, 2011).
Christianity has taken so much from paganism, rightly estimating it as natural gifts of God, given to all humankind, but it is nevertheless perceived in their schooling old Greco-Roman techniques, and, of course, it was not a valuable asset to Christian education. Medieval Christian school was based on the study of Latin authors, and these determined the type of Western education. In Byzantium, education was delivered better and better. Still, it was believed that the type of Christian school was created in Europe in the West, though it was a combination of Christian and pagan ideas of the material. In addition, the school methods were inherited from Roman paganism. As example, there is the fact that in European legislation for a long time the child was totally dependent on parents. In this respect, did a lot of Rousseau. "Emile" all imbued with love for the child and the belief in the good in it. Rousseau had the idyllic view of the child, but at the same time his book is imbued with a love that brings us back to how children looked at the New Testament.
In parallel with the development of this motif, there extends the system of ideas that can be characterized as a pedagogical naturalism; dislike of fun baby is replaced with recognition of the great gifts of the nature of the child. In this respect, played a major role Komensky (1592-1670) - Czech. In the child, there is perceived a natural affinity for light, knowledge, goodness, and the role of education is reduced only to help the child in the process of maturation.
Thus, even before the time of Rousseau, pedagogical thought is moving toward the study of the nature of the child and loving attention to him/her. Note also the British empiricist philosophers Locke, who also had a great impact with his pedagogical ideas on disclosure of natural forces of the child. For him, the child is like a clean slate, which is able to absorb everything that makes the experience. Hence, from these thoughts and as a result of them, there was a belief in the extraordinary influence of the school.
With Rousseau (1712-1778) ended up the movement of educational thought, which had an enormous influence on the development of faith in the natural forces of the child. From now on, it is impossible to build a system of education as if missing a child, regardless of his/her nature, the laws of development. Unfortunately, along with robust ideas, Rousseau has clear expression of gap of pedagogical thought and religious ideas. The problem of education is associated only with the nature of the child and loses its religious side (Brock, 2010).
Rousseau as the chief inspirer of the modern pedagogy is fraught with typical ambivalence. On the one hand, after him, finally, the system of education is based on the study of the nature of the child, which, of course, is consistent with the spirit of Christianity, with its high estimation of the childhood. However, it is in regard to religion and, in particular, its place in education, Rousseau is a member of the Christian-out direction. This separation from Christianity is deeply connected with the whole Enlightenment.
Duality of direction, which was found in Rousseau, to this day did not disappear from pedagogy. Rousseau, one of the most interesting figures in the history of modern culture, is in the spiritual part of many controversial. Sharp criticism of the existing civilization, its abnormal manifestations and the requirement to return to nature and laid down in the human natural forces are very valuable. Nevertheless, caught by the revolutionary spirit of the age, it wanted to change the direction of life by the existing guidance of reason, regardless of history. It was the desire to transform life, by all means, anti-historicism, the denial of tradition. In "Emile" Rousseau shows all these motives (Andreassen, 2014). Departure from civilization, stay of Emile in hothouse, artificial environment in order to give a good beginning to develop freely - all this is utopian and idyllic, involving denial of the reality of original sin and the natural evil in child.
In Rousseau's ideas persistently and powerfully manifested pedagogical naturalism: in his wrong isolation from the coverage of child's upbringing with religion data, and in his right desire to rely on the child, his confidence in the power of the child. Until that time, Christianity was reflected in pedagogy scarcely, being more property of idea than life. It was muted and education went mainly, if not exclusively, under the sign of the Old Testament and combat with child. Incidentally, we note that the Old Testament was here metabolized primarily by the book “Wisdom of Sirach”. Rousseau goes to the other extreme: the first time he admires the nature of the child, but from a purely natural, atheist point of view (Railsback & Wood, 2011).
This desire to enter into the nature of the child was already in the XVII century, expressed in Czech teacher Komensky in establishing the principle of nature-congruity. God gives the soul the natural forces, they need to be found, it is necessary to see the light in a child. The severity as a principle in the education was non-recognition of good in the soul of a child and sounded notes of religious legalism. Near touching of the child gives us the opportunity to see the goodness and light, they are so strong in him. Rousseau is valuable because of his reference to the fact that the natural goodness in children falls into the mainstream of Christian thought.
In the pedagogical naturalism, while having the wrong basic principle, there was the right striving to awaken the light nature of the child as such. "Emile" had a very big impact at the end of the XVIII and XIX century. Now it seems a bit heavy for reading, it is difficult to understand the fascination with it, if you do not see that Rousseau first revealed his love to the child. School should be built so that, based on natural data in the child's mind, it could be developed in a higher power. In children, there is a lot of natural beauty; they have a glimpse of heaven. Those who have close contact with children, see children's extraordinary purity and openness, but recognizes that we need to protect children from being depleted in their spiritual wealth.
Features of pedagogical naturalism, in the conditions of regulation of education, were based on natural movements of the child, consist in denying God's actions during the maturation of the child. Even doctors, when conscious in difficult cases of their impotence, recognize the potential effects on the body of the Divine: "There is only a miracle that can help, pray," - they say. However, this effect is negated by teachers. This is a mistake, for which we pay dearly. Nowhere is this idea can be seen in Rousseau, and the same motif is seen pathetic in all the Enlightenment: through school, without God, to create a healthy and normal person. This problem seems to be quite affordable - you just make education wiser. The point of education is reduced to only limitation that accommodates mind.
Modern pedagogical thought is not fenced off from religion categorically, but is built without it. The best parents rarely feel the religious side in education. Split, reflected in the separation of church and school, it is rooted in the idea of "man-deity", so typical of the Enlightenment: in place of God, there is put only power of the mind. Under the influence of Rousseau, there are created important in the XIX century pedagogical currents. Four big names were carriers of ideas and successors of Rousseauism - Pestalozzi, Froebel, Spencer and Tolstoy.
Pestalozzi (1746-1827) was Swiss brilliant teacher. He is valuable as a Methodist, but more as a teacher at all. Pestalozzi had an extraordinary gift of pedagogical influence, was able to approach the child's soul, inspire and take possession of it. He had to take up the education of street children, and he began to live with them (Stanley, 2012). This live connection, the ability to attract the children acted infinitely better than other measures, and children who were under his supervision, completely changed. Pestalozzi revealed, thus, the highest type of teacher, free from routine, from the outside intellectualism that can enter the child's soul and call it the seeds of kindness, the desire to light. Pestalozzi not only loved children, but also believed in them, and that most contributed to the school to replace the routine exposure to live and live communication with children. This idea is carried by Rousseau - to be closer to the child and give scope of his personality (though Rousseau has never been such practitioner).
Frobel (1782-1852) was influenced by romanticism. In his pedagogical system has found application natural philosophy of Schelling. It was the recognition that all the higher forces of nature are a man who is the crown of life, its top opening. Creative forces of nature are continued and disclosed by the artist. But if there is a higher form of life, which encompasses all creative forces, this implies recognition that the child has a creative force themselves apart from the teacher. Child is like a flower, and teachers - as gardeners. To care for the flowers, not because we are able to create their beauty, for it apart from us they have, but only in order to eliminate all that prevents them - cold wind, which may cause damage - all that going for them adversely . Childcare turns in the children's "garden", where they are gathering (Basak & Ghosh, 2011). Of these thoughts have grown Froebel idea of "kindergarten", which should be developed nature of the child (there is an undeniable influence of Rousseau).
Actually, I must admit that the "idyll" Froebel failed in practice completely. In kindergarten, the combination of love and sober attitude towards children produced an extraordinary affection of children to each other and to the teacher. Children are very precise and finely learn in the garden are the things that the school do not. And even rejecting Christian naturalism as a principle, we must recognize the great achievements in the history of the Christian Froebel pedagogy, as it more than any other brings us back to an understanding of the child's soul, which we find in the Gospel. Even without sharing the principles of naturalism, we are a Christian perspective should welcome all over the pedagogy associated with the name of Froebel, as disclosure of the beginnings of Christianity in relation to the child's soul.
We note here that the doctrine of the system Froebel undergone many changes. More recently, a number of valuable pedagogical methods developed Italian woman doctor Montessori working with defective children. These methods find use in kindergartens. American, German, and partly kindergartens far advanced the fact that it was in the Froebel, and developed a really valuable form of teaching.
References
Andreassen, B. O. (2014). Christianity as culture and religions as religions. An analysis of the core curriculum as framework for Norwegian RE. British Journal of Religious Education, (ahead-of-print), 1-17.
Arthur, J., Gearon, L., & Sears, A. (2010). Education, Politics and Religion: Reconciling the Civil and the Sacred in Education. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. 7625 Empire Drive, Florence, KY 41042.
Basak, R., & Ghosh, A. (2011). School Environment and Locus of Control in Relation to Job Satisfaction among School Teachers–A Study from Indian Perspective. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 29, 1199-1208.
Brock, C. (2010). Spatial dimensions of Christianity and education in Western European history, with legacies for the present. Comparative Education, 46(3), 289-306.
Lawson, J., & Silver, H. (2013). A social history of education in England. Routledge.
Railsback, G., & Wood, D. (2011). Christianity and Moral Identity in Higher Education (review). The Review of Higher Education, 34(2), 347-348.
Stanley, B. (2012). Editorial: A New Face for Studies in World Christianity-and the Many Faces of Christian Education. Studies in World Christianity, 18(1), 1-3.
Walls, A. F. (2011). World Christianity, Theological Education and Scholarship. Transformation: An International Journal of Holistic Mission Studies, 28(4), 235-240.
Werner, D. (2011). Theological Education in the changing context of World Christianity: an unfinished agenda. International Bulletin of Missionary Research, 35(2), 88-92.
