Page:Mind (New Series) Volume 15.djvu/377

 THE FEEEDOM OF THE TEACHER TO TEACH RELIGION. 363 these stories were allegories, and could be interpreted. It was asked : May not the stories covered by the honoured names of Hesiod and Homer be communicated to the young ? Plato's answer is, No. We see the educational quality of his mind in the reason which he gives : A child cannot discriminate between what is allegory and what is not ; and whatever at that age is adopted as a matter of belief, has a tendency to become fixed and indelible ; and, therefore, perhaps, we ought to esteem it of the greatest importance that the stories which children first hear should be adapted in the most perfect manner to the promotion of virtue. The modern Christian disapproves of the ordinary concep- tion of religion which Plato combated, but many nowadays would suggest, judging from their attitude in questions of the day, that, in the circumstances, Plato ought to have advo- cated education with religion left out. But Plato thought education included a satisfaction of the highest needs of the child's nature as well as the lower needs. He no man more would urge that knowledge should grow from more to more, but also desired that more of reverence should pre- vail, especially in the school teaching. His remedy was not secularisation of the schools but the enunciation of educa- tional canons for the religion that should be taught to children. He demanded : 1. That God should never be spoken of in any sense inconsistent with the essence of goodness, and 2. That gods must never be represented as whimsical, fickle, or given to falsehood in any shape. Teaching opposed to these canons, however supported by the authority of poets or priests, is, in his view, degrading and uneducational. When a poet uses language inconsistent with these canons, Plato stipulates that we should not allow our teachers to adopt his writings for the instruction of the young, if we would have them to grow up "to be as godlike and God-fearing as it is possible for man to be ". Plato, of course, makes short work of the difficulties of securing such teaching. He urges that censors should be appointed to supervise all that is to be taught to the young. Such a method would appear to be a State Regulation of religious teaching. But there can be no doubt that had Plato stated who were to be the censors they would not have been the representatives of the poets, priests, or even of the people. They would, in all probability, to use modern terms, have been those experienced in educational discipline, in the study of the reactions and effects upon the growing