Page:PracticalCommentaryOnHolyScripture.djvu/28

 Narrative. The first  stage  in  teaching  Bible  History  is  the  narrative. The teacher  tells  the  story  briefly  and  pithily,  in  such  a way, however, as  to  make  the  actors  stand  out  as  living  beings,  and  enable the children  to  see  with  their  eyes  and  hear  with  their  ears  what  is  said and done. This is  what  Fenelon  called  the  “fundamental  law”  in teaching  Bible  History. Neglect or  slipshod  observance  of  this  rule is prolific  in  failures. And yet,  in  defiance  of  this  “fundamental  law”, children are  often  set  to  learn  the  History  in  the  first  instance  from  a book! What is  the  result? The child,  failing  to  understand  the  story aright at  the  outset,  receives  a blurred  impression  which  is  never  wholly effaced. And no  wonder. The negative  was  bad;  and  no  amount  of subsequent  dilutions  and  retouchings  will  produce  a good  photograph from a bad  negative. It is  essential  that  the  first  impression  should  be  a good  one. If the  child  fails  at  first  to  catch  the  points  of  interest,  it is  bored  by  the  story  ever  afterwards. But if  the  story  is  well  told,  the child’s interest  is  awakened,  and  it  is  all  ears  to  know  something  further. The narrative  is  the  peg  on  which  all  that  follows  is  to  hang. Unless the nail be  firmly  driven  in,  it  will  not  hold  the  picture; so  unless  the  points of the  story  are  clearly  fixed  in  the  child’s  mind,  it  is  labour  wasted  to overlay  it  with  explanations  or  to  attach  pendant  commentaries.

Explanation. A story  well  told  is  half  explained. In telling  the story, hard  words  are,  as  far  as  possible,  to  be  avoided; but  from  time to time,  words  and  phrases,  usages  and  customs  that  need  explaining, will find  their  way  into  the  story. This is  all  that  Catechists  mean  by the  explanation,  viz.,  making  clear  all  that  is  absolutely  necessary  for understanding the  story  aright. It does  not  mean  branching  off  into learned digressions,  or  talking  over  the  children’s  heads. All vapid display of  learning  confuses  rather  than  explains.

Repetition. So far  books  have  been  on  the  shelf. And often they remain  there  much  longer. Some teachers,  taking  their  stand  on high  principles,  rise  to  heights  of  virtuous  indignation  in  denouncing all employment  of  Bible  Histories  as  pernicious. Books, they  say,  degrade the  learning  of  Bible  History  to  the  clumsiest  mechanical  operation, and deal  a death-blow  at  intelligence. But surely  this  denunciation proceeds from  a wrong  conception  of  the  time  and  place  when  books are to  be  used. If the  children  are  made  to  learn  the  history  in  the first instance  from  a book,  undoubtedly  the  objection  has  some  force. Then, however,  not  books  but  wrong  methods  are  to  blame. How can the book  rightly  used  be  fatal  to  intelligence,  since  intelligence  has been brought  into  play  before  the  book  is  used  at  all ? For surely  it  is bringing  violence  to  bear  against  common  sense  to  contend  that  reading a story after  it  has  been  understood,  obliterates  intelligence.