Worldly education compels students, regardless of their needs or future work, to follow a prescribed course of instruction. It deals with students en masse. Christian education recognizes individual needs, and works to perfect individual character. It permits students, in counsel with teachers, to select subjects according to their future needs. The Papacy cannot thrive unless it puts students through a prescribed course, "the grind," to destroy independence and individuality. Protestantism is the reverse.
"This long-drawn-out process, adding and adding more time, more branches, is one of Satan's snares to keep laborers back... If we had a thousand years before us, such a depth of knowledge would be uncalled for, although it might be much more appropriate; but now our time is limited." (Special Testimonies on Education, p. 106).
Elective courses
Thomas Jefferson in his declaration of Principles for the University of Virginia in 1823, said, relative to the stereotype curriculum:
"I am not fully informed of the practices at Harvard, but there is one from which we shall certainly vary, although it has been copied, I believe, by nearly every college and academy in the United States. That is the holding the students all to one prescribed course of reading, and disallowing exclusive application to those branches only which are to qualify them for the particular vocations to which they are destined. We shall, on the contrary, allow them uncontrolled choice in the lectures they shall choose to attend, and require elementary qualifications only and sufficient age." (Herbert B. Adams, Thomas Jefferson and the University of Virginia, p. 123-124 [Government Printing Office, 1888]).
Boone further says,
"This policy has been in operation ever since... There is no curriculum of studies as in most institutions of like grade... This is 'the freedom of teaching;' ... and is the correlative of that ... equally fundamental 'freedom of learning' which in this country has come to be known as the 'open system,' or elective principle." (Education in the United States, pp. 190-191).
Jefferson's plan for an elective course was a blow at one of the fundamental principles of the Papal system which gives the student no choice, and, of course, was opposed by those controlled by the Papal system. Boone says, "In 1814, after numerous defeats and constant opposition from the already William and Mary College, from the Protestant churches, and from most of the political leaders of the time, Mr. Jefferson and his friends sought to provide... a university" which recognized the great principle of liberty in education. (Idem).
Randolph-Macon College, a Methodist institution, founded about 1828, grasped the light of Christian education and made an effort to break away from the mediaeval system which exalted the classics. Randolph-Macon took this action concerning the old mediaeval courses:
"The 'eclectic' system was adopted... It is claimed that more thorough work can be done under this system than under the old curriculum system. But students are not allowed to choose for themselves without consultation with the faculty. Practically, every student has a curriculum chosen for him according to the course he wishes to pursue." (Thomas Jefferson and the University of Virginia, p. 243).
Randolph-Macon had a hard time, and failed to carry out the reform.
"It was a new movement, and it encountered prejudice or cold indifference on the part of the preachers and people." (Ibid., p. 240).
Harvard, that school which imbibed the Papal system of John Sturm from the English Cambridge, and which led all other American schools in the Papal plan of education, was among the first of the older schools to attempt to come into line with true education on this reform. It began about 1824.
"'The experience of Harvard, during the long transition from a uniform required curriculum to a regulated freedom in choice of studies,' might be helpful to other institutions... There was adopted a course [described] as 'by far the broadest plan enacted up to that time.'" (Education in the United States, p. 192).
The students were given large latitude in their choice of studies. They were permitted to "elect from the following subjects... It was a large concession, and had a permanent influence upon the course." (Idem).
Yale, which so closely imitated Harvard in its early history, was materially effected by the reform in courses made by Harvard, and allowed students greater freedom in the choice of studies.
"Even Yale, which has been generally and very properly regarded as the conservator of the principle of authority in college instruction, has granted large liberty in a quarter of a century... So numerous were the concessions that 'nearly one-half of the work of the last two years,' ... 'was left to be determined by each student for himself.' ... [The] juniors [elected] about sixty per cent of their work, and seniors more than eighty per cent. From the standpoint of the ancient, or even of a scholar of the Revolutionary period, the change would seem to be ruinous. ... But no one longer denies either the necessity or the wisdom of the elective principle. 'To permit choice ... is dangerous; not to permit it is more dangerous.'" (Ibid., pp. 197, 198).
The University of Michigan, years ago, loosened up, and "students were allowed to pursue special courses, and secure at their departure, certificates of proficiency."
Cornell University also grasped the principle of Christian education on the subject of elective courses. "Liberty in the choice of studies is regarded as fundamental." In many wide awake schools this question is being asked, "Shall a B. A. degree be given where the classics have been omitted? Johns Hopkins says, Yes." (Ibid., pp. 197-198).
A prominent educator thus summarizes the virtues of the elective system: It encourages the early choice of one's life work; it develops individuality; it gives a chance for individual choice and guidance; it gives opportunity to teach what the student most needs; it best holds the interest of the student; it will early reveal the capacity of the student.
The old established courses were arbitrary, and were necessary to build up an educational trust suited to the needs of the Papacy. Without such courses it was difficult to adumbrate students, making them efficient tools in the hands of the leaders. No one should be allowed, according to their ideas of training, to exercise the right of choice, for fear he could not be directed as an obedient servant by the system when engaged in his life work. Individuality and personality, all independence and originality could be pretty well crushed by putting the students through the regular prescribed course of study. No man was allowed to teach, preach or do anything of importance without first finishing a course and receiving a degree.
So the Lord, in order to prepare workers for the midnight cry, inspired the reformers to attack the hard and fast course of study that had been inherited, practically without change from past centuries-a course that held the students' minds on the dim and musty past; that blinded them to the interesting and practical things of life and unfitted them to enter life capable of putting into practice the things learned in school. Such a training was absolutely useless to one preparing to give the midnight cry.
Degrees
Christians must hold before the world "That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness." The Papacy opposes these truths, and has found its most effective tools in overcoming these unalienable rights to be her educational system with its courses and degrees. On the one hand these destroy freedom, independence, and originality of thought, while on the other hand they develop class distinction, aristocracy and imperialism.
The apostate apostolic church in order to keep her members submissive to her will in teaching, found it necessary to develop an educational trust. This educational monopoly became effective and complete when she adopted the pagan scheme of rigid courses leading to degrees. She gave the form to Christianity, and for the Spirit of God she substituted the pagan spirit. The combination of Christian form and pagan life produced the Papacy. Hartman, writing concerning the educational system of the apostate church, says, "The conferring of degrees was originated by a pope." (Rev. B. Hartman, Religion or No Religion in Education, p. 43).
"Many who professed conversion still clung to the tenets of their pagan philosophy, and not only continued its study themselves, but urged it upon others as a means of extending their influence among the heathen." (Great Controversy. p. 508).
"As long as we sail with the current of the world, we need neither canvas nor oar. It is when we turn squarely about to stern the current that our labors begin, and Satan will bring every kind of theory to pervert the truth. The work will go hard." (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 6, p. 129).
"There is need of heart conversion among the teachers. A genuine change of thought and method of teaching is required to place them where they will have a living connection with a personal Savior." (Ellen G. White, Fundamentals of Christian Education, p. 435).
Thomas Jefferson, the man who wrote that grand old document, The Declaration of Independence, which announced to the world our separation from the Papal form of government, and which enunciates the divine principle that all men are created free and equal, endeavored to develop an educational system in harmony with the reform position which the government had assumed. He saw the necessity of discarding rigid courses and degrees, and introduced the "elective system" as we have seen.
"At first he attempted to drop the long established academic titles, save that of M. D. and to adopt the simple title of Graduate U. V., the name of the school or schools in which the student 'had been declared eminent,' being expressed in his 'certificate,' which was to be 'attested' by the particular professor." (Thomas Jefferson and the University of Virginia, p. 153).
Professor Tappan, first president of the University of Michigan, followed Jefferson's plan. "Students were allowed to pursue special courses, and receive at their departure certificates of proficiency." (Education in the United States, p. 191).
That "first attempts to change old customs brought severe trials," (Ellen G. White, Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 6, p. 141) was well illustrated in the experience of the founders in the University of Virginia, for "in a few years the Board and Faculty were forced to give up the reform."
We have seen that the popular demand for the old established course and degrees was too strong for Jefferson to withstand. Later the spirit of God stirred the churches by setting up an agitation in the Oberlin school, giving them an opportunity to get away from that system so effective in maintaining the Papacy, and to prepare the people of God for the midnight cry. Of Oberlin College it is said,
"The democratic feeling, the spirit of equality, the absence of classes and castes, based upon mere artificial distinctness is almost as marked in the institution as in the village." (The Story of Oberlin, p. 398).
"There has been no positive action by trustees or faculty in opposition to such degrees, only traditional repugnance. Even the common degrees, in course, have been sometimes held in disrepute among the students. Half of the class of 1838, which numbered twenty, declined to receive the degree and the President announced at the commencement that those who desired the degree could receive their diplomas at the college office." (James H. Fairchild, Oberlin: The Colony and the College, p. 267).
The pressure of the church controlling Oberlin was so strong that the reformers were unable to break away from the old educational system. Who can tell how much weight this failure had in reducing the Protestant churches to the condition called "Babylon?"