An overview of the
numerous religious orders in the Roman Catholic Church would show that a
considerable number of these orders have, through their original foundation or
by tradition, been involved in education. In our own country the Benedictines
and the Jesuits, among others, have been known for their major schools, and
many other orders, particularly orders of sisters, have been involved in
education at various levels and to different degrees.
It is an increasingly
common phenomenon in the world of religious education, i.e. that of schools run
by religious orders, that the schools are either closing down, or moving from
religious to lay administration. There are various reasons for this change, but
the principal one is the self-evident fact that the orders simply no
longer have the personnel to staff and
run their schools. Religious life is no longer seen as a compelling life option
to the same degree that it was even thirty years ago, and the self-perpetuating
cycle which existed in many private schools run by religious, whereby the
school was seen as a seed bed for religious vocations, has been irreparably
broken. At the leadership level, the inherent lack of a positive career
structure within religious orders is increasingly seen as a barrier to the
production of effective leadership from within the ranks, although individual
cases can be exemplary exceptions to the rule.
As the orders
withdraw from day-to-day involvement in their schools, there remains in most
cases a desire that some sort of ethos, based on the traditional educational
ethos of the order concerned, be maintained in the schools. This ethos is
generally based on two things: a particular view of education, or an emphasis
on a particular facet or facets of education, propounded by the order’s
Founder, and the lived experience of the members of the order concerned. In many
cases the Founder’s original vision has become clouded by the accretion of
years of pious practice and mythologisation, and the lived experience has
become more central than the primitive inspiration.
In the years
following the Second Vatican Council religious orders were urged to investigate
and re-discover the original spirit of their Founders. For many teaching orders
this process has been concurrent with a withdrawal from full activity and
leadership within their schools. This has meant that the central question for
many such orders is no longer “how do we understand and apply the vision of our
Founder” but rather “how do we understand the vision of our Founder and attempt
to transmit it to and through colleagues who are not members of the order”.
The situation
described is the one facing my own order, the Josephites. Founded in
Today the situation
in
Herein, of course,
lies the problem. Over the course of the years Josephites have been so occupied
in being Josephite teachers that they have never had to take the trouble
to define what that meant. Faced now with the need to confide a
definition of Josephite education to lay colleagues the need has arisen for a
process of investigation, analysis and codification.
My own 1997 M.Phil
thesis[2] was a step this process of investigation, and
the final chapter proposed some definitions of the most prominent features of
Josephite education. The whole process of investigation into the Van
Crombrugghe legacy had been started many years previously, and was pushed into
its “modern” phase by Garcia’s 1980 doctoral
thesis at
The first published
work concerning Constant Van Crombrugghe appeared in 1878, only thirteen years
after his death. This was the “Vie et
Oeuvres du Chanoine Constant Van Crombrugghe”[3] written by Monseigneur C. Pieraerts, former
Rector Magnificus of the
An even more fanciful
book, “As the Stars They Shall Shine”,
was written in 1952 by an American nun, Mother Mary Ignatius d.m.j. This is a
work of popularisation bordering on faction complete with sugar-sweet imagined
conversations between Van Crombrugghe and his parents and the various other dramatis personae of the story. As a
work of academic reference it is of little use, and its syrupy prose style
would find little favour with a contemporary reader. It relies heavily on the
work of Pieraert and Desmet for its factual information, and some sections
would appear to be almost verbatim translations of the previous work.
Another work of
propaganda, the privately published “Constant
Willem Van Crombrugghe; Priester, Pedagoog, Ordestichter”[5] by Fr Leonard de Kort c.j. appeared in 1968.
This book, also translated into French and English, relies like that of Mother
Mary Ignatius on Pieraert and Desmet’s work for its factual content. Being of
later publication and being aimed at vocation work it contains more factual
information concerning the various foundations of the Josephites and the
sister Orders, and concerns itself with events occurring after the death of the
Founder and up until the time of writing.
The first major investigation
into Van Crombrugghe to be undertaken not as a work of uncritical propaganda
was that undertaken in the late 1940s and early 1950’s by Fr Jacques Jorissen
cj. This work was intended for private publication but was, in fact, suppressed
by the Josephite authorities of the time and languished, hidden from sight, for
many years until photocopies began to see the light of day in the early 1980s.
His “Constant Van Crombrugghe” and the later
“Essai de Décryptage Psychologique” take a broad and analytical view of
Van Crombrugghe’s life and work vis-à-vis the Diocese of Ghent, the Josephites
and the three congregations of sisters which he also founded. The major
contribution of Jorissen to a contemporary understanding of Van Crombrugghe is
acknowledged here as it has already been
in Powell (1997). Since 1997 a draft translation into English of Jorissen’s
work has been undertaken by Fr Robert Hamilton cj.
1971 saw an awakening
of academic interest in the Founder at the Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium.
Christiaan de Geeter published in that year his Licentiate Thesis in the
Faculty of Pedagogy “Opvoeding en
Onderwijs bij Constant Van Crombrugghe.”[6] Whilst this work contains much interesting
information it is somewhat limited in
its scope.
In 1980 a major
milestone in the understanding of Van Crombrugghe was reached with the
publication by Fr Guillermo Garcia c.j. of his Doctoral Thesis, also at
Another, very
different, thesis was published by Danny Bauters in 1981, this time in the
In the following years
Sr Theresa Clements d.m.j. completed her Doctoral Thesis at the
The history of the
period, and particularly the educational history, is not a rich field,
especially in the English language. De Meeus’ “History of the Belgians” (1962) in an English translation by G.
Gordon provides an interesting general read, but with no referencing or
bibliography. A richer source is J.A. Kossman-Putto & E.H. Kossman’s “The
In other languages, a
more weighty coverage yet is given by H. Pirenne’s massive “Histoire de Belgique”, of which Volumes
V and VI cover the period in question. Its sheer mass of detail makes it a
daunting prospect, though, as in most other historical works consulted, there
is little concerning education.
As far as Van
Crombrugghe texts are concerned, very little has appeared before in English
translation. The “Règlement des
Professeurs”, “Guide Pédagogique” and “Directoire
des Surveillants” did exist in English, in a rather piously-worded and
sometimes inaccurate translation dating from the 1950’s. These texts as they
appear here are translations prepared by this writer in 1984. The other
documents: the “Règlement du Collège
d’Alost”[8] , Van
Crombrugghe's speeches of 1815 , and Van Crombrugghe's intervention at the
National Congress of 1830
are new translations which were prepared by the writer specifically for the
1997 thesis. They are included as an Appendix here under the guise “Documents for Educators” since they
have been gathered together as such and privately published for the staffs of
Josephite schools. A Chapter on these documents, based on the work done in my
M.Phil. thesis, in included here for the sake of completeness.
Since 1997 one new
publication has shed some much needed light on the development of education in
A further process of
publication has also followed in the years since 1997, namely a privately
published series of documents, concerned with Van Crombrugghe and the
Josephites, under the general heading of “Studia Josephitica”. The aim of this
series has been to bring to light documents which would otherwise languish in
our Archives or simply be forgotten. The series has been published by myself in
collaboration with Father Robert Hamilton cj. and Father Honoré Smets cj. Where
possible documents which are in other languages have been translated into
English, and a copy of the whole series is lodged in the Van Crombrugghe
Library at
The main documents in
the series are Van Crombrugghe’s letters to his parents (107 letters) and to
Josephites (652 letters), translated from the French and Flemish by myself:
these are the keystones of the current research. These letters have been
annotated in so far as has been possible, and are submitted as part of this
thesis. I have to acknowledge the considerable contribution to this process of
the late Fr Honoré Smets cj who was kind enough to provide French translations
of those letters whose originals are in Flemish and to help with the
translation from French of the more obscure passages in the letters.
There is also a
similar number of letters from Van Crombrugghe to the Ladies of Mary which have
been translated and edited by Sister Alice Nugent dmj.
A further document,
and one which is considered in depth in this thesis, is the Diary of the first
Superior General, Ignace Van den Bossche.
A full list of
the “Studia Josephitica” documents
appears in the Appendix.
It is not the
intention here to attempt to prove or disprove any particular thesis: rather
the intention is to present the written, archival evidence and, based on that
evidence, to come to conclusions and present further questions for
consideration.
Two ideas from
Jorissen have been at the back of my mind during the research process, and these
will be returned to in the conclusions.
Jorissen speaks of Van
Crombrugghe in two ways:
·
“The ideal
of the Josephites as the Founder conceived it in his clear wisdom and burning
clarity”.
and
·
“…..
wishing to produce good results with inadequate subjects, he inevitably makes
us think of a chess master
·
. After a
few initial thrusts, we see him carefully preparing his moves; suddenly,
completely exploiting a fortuitous circumstance, he makes his decision
and, profiting from a series of
advantages, shoots ahead. The he pauses for a long time to consolidate his
position or, if he meets an unforeseen obstacle, he retreats and completely
rethinks his tactics, all the while seeking out better possibilities”[9]
The reader is
counselled, as he reads the pages which follow, to hold in his mind these two
pictures to which we will return in the final Chapter.
A number of conventions
are used in this thesis with regard to names and languages.
As has been noted in
the introductory chapter, my own 1997 M.Phil. thesis, “Constant
Van Crombrugghe (1789-1865) and Education;
the genesis, evolution and application of the educational philosophy of
a 19th century Roman Catholic Educator”
continued the process of investigation into Van Crombrugghe by attempting to
define how Van Crombrugghe viewed education, and concluded by proposing some definitions of his educational
principles.
Its focus was,
therefore, rather different to the current research as it sought to concentrate
on Van Crombrugghe himself and the factors which influenced the development of
his educational views. The focus of the current research is rather the story of
the development of the Josephites as the inheritors of his views and the people
who had, with varying degrees of success, to put his views into action. It aims
to give an overview of the various currents and personalities involved in the
development of the Josephites as a teaching institute from the
foundation of the Institute in 1817 to the death of the Founder in 1865, and to
draw conclusions as to the nature of Josephite education as shaped by Constant
Van Crombrugghe and his early collaborators and such as it had been realised in
Van Crombrugghe’s lifetime. In this context it could be characterised as an
almost entirely introspective evaluation, focussing almost without exception on
the data available and, therefore, as interpreted by the writers of the
documents. It does, therefore, build on and continues the work previously done,
not only in my own thesis but in the other works mentioned in the introduction.
No apology is made for
the inclusion of a number of sections from the M.Phil. thesis as these are
sections which give a wealth of background information germane to the current
research and, indeed, a reader of this thesis could well be at a loss to
understand the context of the various events described and assertions made in
the present work. Where elements of the earlier work have been included they
are specifically acknowledged as such.
There is no specific
thesis to prove or disprove in the current research; rather it is an attempt at
elucidation of an historical story through interpretation of archival data, a
vignette of an educational movement at a particular time and place, and a
distillation of the principal threads of that story. The intention is not to
focus on the development of the Josephites as a Religious Congregation except
where those elements are bound up – as they frequently are – in the development
of the schools.
It could be argued that
all historical research is archival, and therefore the inclusion of “based on
archival sources” in the title of this thesis is un-necessary. However the
inclusion of these words in the title is done deliberately to highlight the
difference in approach between the earlier M.Phil. which was based principally
on commonly available sources and the current work which has involved a large
amount of consultation, transcription and translation of original material.
It has to be acknowledged
that there is a degree of crossover between the two theses and the reader is
counselled to consult the M.Phil. thesis in order to reach a fuller
understanding of the background to the current work. Where it has been felt
necessary, elements from the M.Phil. have been included here and acknowledged
as such. This has been particularly necessary in the following chapter which
attempts to set the work of Van Crombrugghe and the Josephites in a historical
context.
A principal difference
between my M.Phil. research and the current project is the availability of a
large body of archival material which was not available at the time of
undertaking the M.Phil. This includes:
- evidence from Van
Crombrugghe’s correspondence, in particular the extant letters between himself
and a) various early Josephites and b) his parents. The originals of these
letters were not available for consultation at the time that my previous thesis
was being written. These letters, all originals, are stored in individual
envelopes contained in ring binders. Many of them are somewhat frail and should
be handled with care. The numbering system used in this thesis is my own and
will not be found on the envelopes containing the originals. The letters are
stored in chronological order with the letters to his parents as a separate
collection. They are indexed as III-D-1 to 8[10].
- The circulars of
early Superiors General, Ignace Van den Bossche (1st Superior General),
Stanislas De Haeck (2nd Superior General) and Rémi de Sadeleer (3rd
Superior General). These are stored in book form in the handwriting of the
author with the exception of all but a few of the earliest of Van den Bossche’s
circulars which are in Stanislas’ hand. Each General has a separate book. They
are indexed as IV-A-2,3 and 4.[11]
- Chapter documents, particularly those
dealing with educational matters and leading up to the take-over of College
Melle in 1837. As these documents are quoted more or less in their entirety in
the Superior General’s Circular immediately following the Chapter they are
considered within the context of the Circulars. The Chapter records are stored
in book form as III-B-1.
- Early account books
of the Congregation which are the sole remaining record of who was where when,
thus giving an insight into how various personalities shaped the educational
basis of the Congregation. These records appear in the Appendix and I
acknowledge the work of Fr Honoré Smets in their preparation. They are stored
on open shelves IX-B-7,8 and 9.
All of the documents
noted above were housed at the time of consultation in the Josephite Archive at
Melle[12]. To call the collection an archive in the
traditional sense is, perhaps, a misnomer. The word used in the house to refer
to the collection is “secretariat” and this is a more accurate description. It
is only in the past few years that an archivist has been appointed, and he
would more accurately be described as “the person in charge of the archives”
rather than an archivist per se. This is to say that the appointee has no
particular skills but is simply the person under whose umbrella of
responsibilities the archives fall. The origins of the archive collection are
as the secretariat of the Superior General and over the years the archive has
simply been the place where the various documents pertaining to the Superior
General’s period of office have been stored. The care with which this has been
done has unfortunately varied from General to General. More recently other
documents and collections pertaining to the history of the Institute have been
added, but there is no particular requirements for copies of documents of any
specific type to be submitted to the archive. The situation has been
complicated since the 1960s by the division of the Institute into Regions or
Provinces, each with its own governmental structure. Inevitably this has meant
the fragmentation of holding points for documentation and most recently the
archive has been seen as the Belgian regional archive, albeit holding material
of interest at the Institute level.
The archive room itself
is small, gloomy and unconducive to study. Most items are contained in a
collection of cupboards around the walls. There is a rudimentary indexing
system in book form by which items are indexed by cupboard, shelf and item. So,
for example, the records of General Chapters 1835 – 1857 are indexed as
“III-B-1”, that is: cupboard 3, shelf B, item 1. The index has not been kept up
to date and many items relating to the past ten years are neither indexed nor
stored. In the past two years (2001 – 2003) the archives have been moved to
more salubrious surroundings in the former noviciate area of Grammont and it is
there that they can be consulted at the time of writing[13]. There are tentative plans in existence (June
2003) to hand the whole collection over to KADOC, the Catholic Documentation
Centre at the University of Louvain, who specialise in the maintenance of
archives and who already hold the archives of a number of Belgian
congregations. Whatever happens in the future the Josephite archives are badly
in need of complete re-indexing and cross-referencing.
Background
The background to the
current research is here considered under three headings: findings from my own
M.Phil. research; an overview presented by Grootaers[14]; a consideration of Van Crombrugghe as a link
in the historical chain of Jesuit inspired education.
The historical background to the
development of Van Crombrugghe’s educational thought has been previously
outlined in my own M. Phil. thesis. The principal points from that thesis are
incorporated here for the sake of completeness, but the reader is again
counselled to read the fuller account in that thesis
The beginning of
Austrian influence in
During the long period of Habsburg rule there
was considerable tension between the monarchy and the Church due to the reforms
which the monarchy, particularly Joseph II, tried to impose. He ruled as an enlightened despot, in line
with the following description:
“The ruler can dispose
of everything in the state, without exception..... Privileges which are
disadvantageous to the state are always invalid”[15]
This remark was, of
course, aimed at the institution which stood par excellence between the monarch and the exercise of complete
freedom, i.e. the Roman Catholic Church. This is not to say that Joseph singled
out the Church for specific ill-treatment - he was, after all, a Roman Catholic
himself. Rather he quite dispassionately
regarded the Church simply as one element (albeit a major element) in the
machine of state, and, as such, everything which prevented the Church from
acting as an efficient contributor to the building of a modern, unitary state
had to go. In espousing this attitude he alienated much of the population of
the largely Roman Catholic
As the Enlightenment
progressed so the utilitarian ideal of the “useful citizen” became much more
prominent. Johann Ignaz von Felbiger, who was one of the most influential
contemporary educational theorists in
“a. honest citizens;
b) good citizens; that is faithful and obedient subjects of the authorities;
and c) useful people for the community.”[16]
As will later be seen,
these aims, albeit set in a Christian and Catholic context, are remarkably
similar to those of Van Crombrugghe.
Joseph II turned his
reforming eye on the field of education, believing that a sound, uniform
education system was at the heart of a unitary state. In an ordinance published
in the first year of his reign he stated:
“The schoolchildren
should remind themselves constantly that every human being has a moral
obligation to develop his intellectual powers as far as possible and that the
study by which this is achieved is a duty imposed by God; that every citizen
has a similar obligation to make himself capable of serving the state.”[17]
In the universities,
practical (i.e. “useful”) subjects blossomed at the expense of the more
ephemeral. The grammar schools also suffered: Joseph did not believe in
over-production of intellectuals and imposed school fees, as a result of which
attendance dropped rapidly. All schools that did not fit in with Joseph’s
ideals were suppressed, and 813 were closed.
In the field of primary
education, however, Joseph improved the situation enormously. He created many
new primary schools at a time when it was a neglected area of education; he
ensured that primary school teachers were paid proper salaries; he ensured
attendance by offering financial rewards to parents whose children were regular
attenders and fining those whose children were not. Finally, and unusually for
the era, he laid emphasis on the education of girls. As a result, by 1790 there
were relatively more children at school in the Austrian Empire than in any
other part of
In considering the
policies brought to bear by the Austrians on the
“It would be
absolutely contrary to our goal to concentrate the literary profession under
one sole class or order of persons, and such an interesting enterprise demands
that its scope be spread as wide as possible in order to deem apt for this
profession all whose who have the necessary qualities without regard for their
state.”
[18]
The Austrian government wanted to fight the
corporate monopolies - not least the clerical ones - in order to arrive at a
maximal use of the available labour and talent available in the
It was almost impossible
in the
Even the secular clergy
were not exempt from these measures, and the planned general overhaul of the
parish system also had implications for educational policy. The reorganisation
of training for the country clergy, through the foundation of the General
Seminary had as one of its goals the formation of the parish priest to become
the “village educator”. In this way, the General Seminary can be considered as
a corollary of the normaalscholen,
although their initial aim was the formation of teachers in the towns. However
little these plans for the secular clergy may have had effect, the same is not
true of the Austrians’ policy towards religious. Their slowing down of the
formation of “modern” religious communities, and the secularisation of old
ones, gave birth to a new population group from which many of the eighteenth
century volksscholen had to recruit
their personnel: “pious ladies” and lay brothers. As Bonenfant[19]indicates, some new male congregations of about
this date were specifically founded as congregations of Brothers in order to
avoid these problems. He makes specific reference to the (slightly later)
Broeders van Dale, but points out that even the Brothers of the
It is clear, however,
that Austrian education policy in the
Developments in primary
education in the last quarter of the eighteenth century meant that adequate
education was available to those who could pay for it. This did not, however,
help those who could not pay, and those provisions which were in force could
not stem the growing tide of pauperism. Urban schools for the poor were
evolving from open day schools to closed boarding schools with a limited number
of “charity boarders”. Sunday catechism classes, which the Jesuits had
organised in many Belgian cities, were abolished with the Order in 1773. After
that, the poor themselves intervened and many unqualified mistresses found
themselves looking after children for next to nothing. Central government and
some bishops wished to intervene and many plans were drawn up and even tried.[22] Practically every plan for the foundation of
schools for the poor had as first objective “to make the children hard-working
from a tender age”.[23] These schools were aimed at the reduction of
pauperism by “getting them used to successful work from their childhood, and
giving them, along with a useful occupation of their time, some instruction and
good habits.”[24] They were to open their doors to all, and to be
“where the poor might send their children for them to continue to learn how to
work at the same time as being instructed in the principles of our religion”.[25]
It is known that the
problem of pauperism was important for Austrian policies: a lot of the measures
undertaken by Joseph II which might otherwise be seen as “cruel” might be
justified by his zeal for the reformation of provision for the poor and their
education.[26] The profits from the dissolution of the
“useless” religious houses and confrèries
were all destined in some way for the creation of facilities through which
poverty could be fought. The failure to produce concrete results from these
initiatives was one of the causes of the revolution - Art suggests that the
money might have found its way into Joseph II’s own purse.[27]
In the eighteenth
century there occurred a considerable increase in the number of schools
available for primary education (lager
onderwijs) especially in the context of popular education (volksonderwijs). There was a particular
growth in the field of primary schools for girls. Both the government and
committed burghers were keen to combat pauperism through the medium of
education.
D’Hoker (1982), taking
his figures from Geysen (1957), notes that in Leuven there were 10 primary
schools in 1700, and 65 in 1795. Of the 65, 52 were girls’ schools.
An important subgroup
of these schools, especially in view of what Van Crombrugghe was later to found
in Geraardsbergen, were the schools given over to vocational education (beroepsonderwijs), and it can be noted
that most of the “new” primary schools had a vocational emphasis. Broadly
speaking, these vocational schools can be divided into two categories: the weeschool (orphanage) and the werkschool (workhouse - though not
exactly in the English sense). The Josephites would
begin by running a werkschool in
Geraardsbergen.
As an example of the
first type - the weeschool - D’Hoker,
relying on information from Warmoes (1962) gives a full description of the
Bogaardenschool in Brugge. This school, which had actually been founded in
1513, was a boarding school for orphans, waifs and strays from the age of 9 or
10. These children would stay in the school for a maximum of 6 years, during
which their education would pass through two phases. In the first phase they
would be taught reading and writing and, to a lesser extent, arithmetic. From
the age of 13 the technical training began, though it should be noted that that
the cleverest boys would not follow the vocational route but would receive a
secondary education, though, as the century progressed, the relative number of
boys in this category declined.
The vocational training
was not given in the school itself: rather the boys were contracted out to
master tradesmen in the city who would, over two or three years, give them a
full training in the trade. In the evenings the boys came back to the school to
follow an hour of reading and writing. Even on Sundays and feastdays there were
two hours of literary training (literair
onderricht) and throughout the whole process there was a strong current of
moral and religious education[28].
In the second category
of school - werkschool, sometimes
called handwerkschool - the technical
training was given in the school itself. For the most part, these schools were
run by women of the lowest class, and, although reading and writing would be on
the timetable, few of the women could actually read and write themselves. As
far as work training was concerned, this would include simple hand crafts:
sewing, knitting, carpet weaving, spinning and lace manufacture. Most of the werkscholen only dealt in one craft and
by far the most widespread was lace manufacture. Indeed, many of the schools
were known by their specific craft rather than under the generic title of werkschool: nayschole, breischole, spinneschole, spellewerckschole etc. In
these schools the pupils spent practically the whole day at work, the silence
broken only by prayer and hymns.
Because of the
intellectual poverty of the ladies who ran these schools, the pupils mostly
received such academic formation as was available from the local Sunday School[29], where, apart from catechism, basic literacy
might also be taught. It should be remembered that, at least in the early part
of the century, the local koster
(usually translated as “sacristan” but probably more akin to the Anglican
“sexton”) who would run the Sunday School with the priest was probably also the
local schoolmaster.
The costs of these
schools was for the most part covered by the sale of whatever the children
produced, and it would be some years before a child’s parents could expect to earn anything from the child’s work.
Many of these schools
were established by parish clergy, by orders of nuns, or by begijnen or pious women. Sometimes it
would be the well-off burghers of a city who would establish such a school for
the relief of the poor. Sometimes again it would be widows and spinsters who
would set up these schools with themselves as schoolmistresses. In some cases,
particularly in the cities, this last instance would lead to what were called sluikscholen - or “clandestine schools”.
Because of the lack of any form of educational qualification on the part of
these well-intentioned ladies, they were unable to join the teachers’ guilds, a
necessary affiliation in the cities. Warmoes (1962) cites the case in Brugge
where the ladies attempted to gain credibility by joining the linen workers’
guild - de gilde der lijnwadiers - instead.
It is clear that the
system of werkscholen cannot be seen per se as an answer to the educational
needs of the poorer classes. Primarily their end, if not their aim, was to
remove the poor from the streets and to provide a trained workforce rather than
an educated populace. In most cases there were long days of work with a minimum
of academic input leading to virtual exploitation of the children.
In theory, weescholen and werkscholen were established out of charity and sympathy for the
poor. However, the actual reasons run deeper than that. Other motives stand
out: a concern for public order in the face of widespread pauperism, and
instinct for self-preservation on the part of the wealthier classes. Town
councils wished to be freed from the considerable financial burdens which
pauperism caused them. Even the clergy and religious orders were not free of
practical considerations: they hoped to gain vocations from the lower classes.
“The support of the
Bishop in the matter of the schools for the people was very important. However
his contributions were mainly directed at those pupils who wished to study
further and eventually to become priests, either regular or secular. The help
offered by the diocese was, therefore, primarily and uniquely targeted at
vocations from amongst the lower classes.” [30]
Many of the lay
schoolmistresses simply saw the establishment of a werkschool as a way of making a living and the benefit of the
children was subordinated to their own financial profit.
The contribution of the
werkscholen to the intellectual
development of the popular classes was negligible.[31] This can be attributed to the lack of academic
education per se in such schools, the
general dearth of qualifications among those who ran them. Even on a spiritual
level the accent was on dull acceptance.
D’Hoker comes to the
following conclusion:
“Maybe the werkscholen
did succeed in achieving their moral and social goals, but from a human - and
even economic - standpoint they certainly did not. In this sense they do not
deserve the description of “technical education”. To often the werkscholen were
work establishments rather than educational establishments.[32]
D’Hoker also (p.108)
describes the establishment of a religious werkschool
in Veltem. It would be useful to look at the description he gives, and the
conclusions he draws from it, since there are some parallels to be drawn with
the first school founded by Van Crombrugghe in Geraardsbergen. His description
is based on that given by Bulteel (1978) in his history of the Sisters of the
Annunciation of Heverlee - this was an order which grew from the nucleus of a
small group of women - vrome dochters (pious
daughters) - who helped de Clerk in Veltem, just as the small group of women
who helped Van Crombrugghe in Geraardsbergen would form the nucleus of the his
order of sisters.
Petrus Jacobus de Clerk
was the parish priest of Veltem, near
“...that they be
instructed in christian knowledge; that they be inspired to good morals; a
taste for good order; an inclination to and affection for work; and also that
when the children are not working for themselves their work should be esteemed
and that a salary should be paid, that is, what they earn by their work.”[33]
D’Hoker’s conclusions
following on from this description are worth quoting in full as they will have
a bearing on Van Crombrugghe’ later work in the early part of the evolution of
the Josephites.
“Out of Christian
compassion De Clerk answered the needs of the people. He understood that there
was a real connection between material and spiritual poverty. For him, the
opening of a werkschool was the best way to the material, moral and religious
salvation of the poor. In this sense he distanced himself from the traditional
stance of the Church in the field of education, which was, in the spirit of the
counter-reformation, to concern itself principally with the forming of an upper
class elite and the catechesis of the ordinary people. The werkshool offered an
education which was more à propos to the needs of the time and which had a
clear character of necessity. In this sense it followed to a certain degree
some of the pedagogical ideas of the Enlightenment: adaptive pedagogy,
utilitarian education, reduction of poverty through education. The thinkers of
the Enlightenment defended the notion of sound education for the masses but at
their own level.”[34]
At the level of secondary education two types can be distinguished: the algemeen-vormend (general education) and
beroepsgericht onderwijs (technical
education). The first type was generally available in the collèges or Latin schools where there would be a fairly broad
syllabus of the humanities. In the time of the Austrian Netherlands there were
about seventy such schools.[35] The teaching was done by regular or secular
clergy, and the involvement of lay teachers was minimal. These schools De
Vroede calls “public schools” in order to distinguish them from the smaller,
private Latin schools run by lay teachers, priests, or ex-Jesuits after the
suppression of the order. De Vroede states that little information is available
concerning these private Latin schools. De Vroede also indicates a paucity of
information concerning another type of secondary school: the non-Latin schools
which he calls instituten, pensionaten or
Franse (Waalse) scholen (institutes,
boarding schools or French (Walloon) schools.[36] These
schools can be placed in the “secondary” category, but more often than not also
gave primary education. These schools seem to have been well-established
throughout the 18th. century and into the 19th., but there was often friction
between their staffs and those of the “public” schools. Van Crombrugghe himself
attended two of these schools,[37] the Hermitage
de Wilhours near Ath, which he attended from 1802-3, and the Pensionnat de Wulf in
Although there had been
some moves towards a modernisation of the curricula of the collèges since the 1750’s, in general they remained in the
mainstream of the humanistic tradition.[40] Modern languages, mathematics and natural
sciences were by and large absent. However, by the end of the century in a few
towns, for example Antwerpen[41] and Luik[42] language teachers and mathematics teachers (who
even taught book keeping) were active. De Vroede also notes[43] the opening of a free mathematical school in
Luik in 1781.
Although the teaching
in the collèges was given by religious, it does not necessarily
follow that the schools were also owned by the orders. The staff of a collège could be appointed by the local
government, by the local magistrate in conjunction with the parish priest, or
by the magistrate in conjunction with the trustees of the school. In these
cases, the staff would be secular clergy. On the other hand, the local
administration could give the direction of a school completely over to an
order. De Vroede cites the following cases:[44] Veurne (Oratorians[45] since 1714), Zinnik (Oratorians since 1709),
Hoogstraten (Franciscans since
1688), Tongeren (Augustinians since 1625), Edingen (Augustinians since 1623)
and
Whether the town
council appointed the staff or the religious superior, the town would to a
greater or lesser extent, bear the
financial burden of the school.[47] Could one not, therefore, conclude that these
were “public” schools? The town councils treated them as such, including the
Jesuit schools. It is interesting to note, as Chanterie points out, in 1793
when the Jesuit schools were closed the insistence of the authorities of
various towns on the maintenance of their college.[48]
New initiatives on the
part of the government in 1773 created a new situation. Previous to that time
the central government had had some power over schools and over local authorities,
but De Vroede[49] indicates that the lack of specific information
makes it difficult to come to any conclusions. However, the fact that there is
so little information suggests that intervention by central government was very
limited.
However, in the later
1770’s this situation changed, and De Vroede indicates that the government now
wished to direct and co-ordinate all the collèges
at the level not only of the infrastructure but also of curriculum. Chanterie[50] suggests that they were not seeking a monopoly,
but a clear directive role.
Authority over the kleine scholen cannot be considered in
globo since there was a great deal of regional variation. In the 16th. century
it was the Church authorities alone who exercised authority over these schools.
By the 17th. century the civil authorities were in some places sharing the
responsibility with the Church, in others taking it over completely, and in yet
others leaving it entirely to the Church.[51] Conflicts between the two were not uncommon and
continued into the 18th. century.
In any case, the
appointment of a teacher by the civil authority could not take place until
guarantees of the candidate’s “Catholicity” had been received, and that he had
made the Oath of Fidelity to the Church (eed
van trouw aan het geloof); this meant that discussion between the civil and
Church authorities was inevitable. This meant that frequently the candidate was
tested for his suitability by a committee with both civil and Church members.
In those cities where there was a teachers’ guild (Antwerpen, Brugge, Brussel,
The situation is
further complicated by the fact that the salaries of the teachers were paid
from various sources; not only the civil coffers, but also from charitable
foundations and contributions from parents. It could sometimes be the whole
community who contributed, and therefore had some influence over who was
appointed. Matthieu[54] notes that in most villages in the
Further blurring of
distinctions comes from the fact[55] that the functions of schoolmaster and sexton
were often filled by the same person, generally a layman, who would, therefore,
be paid by both civil and Church authorities. As the appointment of the sexton
could, in some cases, be a civil appointment the web becomes even more tangled.
Although there are clear
regional differences, the number of religious involved in teaching in the kleine scholen was smaller than that of
lay persons.[56] In this sense, the laicisation of education was
more developed in the kleine scholen
than in the collèges.
As far as primary and
secondary public education is concerned one can conclude that the Church
authorities continued to play a major role, but that that of the civil
authorities can easily be underestimated.[57] The big difference between this and the collèges lies in the non-intervention of
central government, which maintained its non-interventionist stance right until
the end of the Ancien Régime.
Although there were
some changes through the century in the ideas of the ruling classes concerning
education for the masses in general the awareness of social class and
“suitable” education remained the same. De Vroede[58] illustrates this point from two sources: the Plan d’éducation pour la jeunesse de Liège
of 1773[59] and the third plan developed in
“That lower class
children should receive the same education as nobles was not only laughable,
but dangerous to the State.”[61]
Children of labourers
and tradesmen were to strive to develop their physical and technical skills and
to grow into a simple lifestyle; a completely different lifestyle was foreseen
for the clergy, lawyers, doctors etc. For them was planned:
“strength of mind and
heart, talents, sciences, politeness, good manners, an acquaintance with the
ways of the world, etc.”[62]
whereas for the working
class it was a case of:
“simplicity of manner, docility of behaviour,
resignation to doing without luxuries.”[63]
The kleine scholen restricted their
curriculum to reading, writing and religious instruction, though writing was in
the main considered a luxury for the working class.[64] One question which remains unanswered,
according to De Vroede, is that of who actually went to these schools? We do
not even know what was the social standing of the parents who paid for their
children to go to the schools. The presence of paying and free pupils at these
schools underlines the difference between them and the werkscholen, but we know nothing of the difference in clientèle
between them and the boarding schools, whether there was a difference between
boys and girls, between the towns and the countryside.
One area where more
information is available concerns the clientèle of the Latijnse scholen. The information that does exist leads De Vroede[65] to conclude that an education in the humanities
was not exclusively the reserve of the upper classes.
One major factor is the
fact that the Jesuits and other
religious orders (except the Augustinians) offered education for free.[66] Conversely, collèges
run by secular clergy were not. It would be possible, therefore, in an area
where there was a collège run by an
order for a child of lower class origin to receive a classical education.
If the education itself
were free, boarding costs, on the other hand, were high. De Vroede[67]quotes an average of 120 - 200
1. Those who take all
meals with the teachers - 150
2. Those who take
their
3. Those who eat only
at midday with the teachers but who for breakfast and in the evening receive
only good beer - 100 Brabant guilders.
4. Those who only take
soup and beer - 6 pounds.
5. Those who take
their
It was also possible to
attend certain collèges for nothing
through bursaries. In many Oratorian-run collèges
there were pupils who paid their living costs by working in the school.
The question has to be
asked, therefore, how many poor pupils actually did attend the collèges? De Vroede[71]is rather vague in his answer to this question:
according to him they were “not many but a significant minority”. Similarly,
the sons of the nobility were not particularly well represented either.[72] Numbers varied from school to school. De Vroede[73]based on information from Lindemans[74] concludes that most of the pupils were from the
upper and lower middle classes and from the pachters[75].
However, the Theresian
reforms brought with them the end of free education in the Austrian
Netherlands, and in 1777 the paying of school fees was made obligatory. By
doing this, the government wanted to limit the education of the lower classes
without eliminating it entirely - the Royal Commission for Studies could be
requested in individual cases to provide free education. A justification for
this was given by de Nelis[76]to the Academy: free education lowered the
intellectual level of education by destroying the spirit of competition among
teachers; paying would have the opposite effect.
In the
French years (1795-1814) De Vroede states that the intention of the
French authorities was to pull down the whole of the existing education system
to make way for a new one.[77] Specifically the control of education could not
remain in the hands of the Church, and Church schools were to be replaced by
official state controlled institutions. In contrast to the previous situation
with the Austrians, this was a political, rather than pragmatic, decision.
A number of regulations
were issued in the years 1796-1798 which were to have disastrous consequences:[78]
1. The suppression of
religious orders and the confiscation of
their property - regulation of 15 Fructidor IV (
2. Imposition on all,
including teachers and all priests, of the oath of hatred for royalty - law of
19 Fructidor V (
3. The obligation to
teach the “Declaration of the rights of man and of the citizen” as well as
republican ethics - declaration of 17 Pluviose VI (
Given the nature of the
existing teaching corps, these regulations led to the demise of almost all the collèges. The existing state collèges remained open pending the establishment of the new écoles centrales, albeit without
religious instruction on the timetable. As far as primary education was
concerned the effects were less drastic, given that there were many more lay
teachers than religious and that the sheer numbers of kleine scholen made it difficult for the laws to be enforced. Apart
from anything else, the control of the kleine
scholen was entrusted to the local civic authorities who were not
necessarily keen to implement the new regulations.
On the other side of
the coin, the Constitution of the year III give rise to the “freedom” (i.e.
freedom from Church control) of education. Many ex-religious and ex-beguines
came back into education as trained and experienced individuals. This was not
the real aim of the revolutionary powers, who wished to establish a net of
completely lay public schools. These will be dealt with under the same headings
as for the situation before 1795.
Following the law of 3
Brumaire IV (
All the schools listed
above were public schools, but State intervention took various different forms.
The organisation and finance of the écoles
centrales came under the departmental authorities who appointed the
teachers subject to approval from central government. Day to day running of the
school was overseen by an administrative council, chosen by and from the staff
itself.
The lycées were directly under the control
of central government, who appointed the staff and the boarding pupils.
The town authorities, however, were responsible for the finance.
The écoles sécondaires were left entirely to
local authorities and individual initiative, and about thirty of these schools
were established.[80] A school established by an individual could be
recognised by the State as an école
sécondaire but had, according to the law of 19 Vendemiaire XII (
Lycées and écoles sécondaires, and indeed all
educational establishments, were controlled as from 1808 by the
The écoles céntrales had only lay teachers,
admittedly with a number of ex-priests among them, and there was no religious
instruction. In the lycées on the
other hand, religious instruction had a privileged place, a chaplain was appointed
and priests were on the staff. The local écoles
sécondaires were, de facto, confessional. Almost all had priests as
headmasters and, in 1813, priests and religious constituted a third of the
staff.[82]
The écoles centrales had no boarding
sections, and therefore the pupils were almost entirely local. De Vroede poses
the question: from which social class(es) did they come?
He notes[83] that there are different answers to this
question depending on locale.
In Brugge and
De Vroede concludes[85] that the écoles
centrales simply took their clientèle from wherever they happened to be
situated, generally children of the middle class rather than privileged
children. Even thought the education was not free, a quarter of the pupils from
each section[86]could be taken in free, and the government
allocated twenty bursaries to each school. Unfortunately these bursaries were
handed out fairly indiscriminately and they were discontinued at the beginning
of the year X. There was also money available from the foundations enjoyed by
the former collèges and which,
according to the law of 25 Messidor V (
The lycées had boarders and their clientèle
was, therefore, not restricted to the local population. As a result, their
clientèle seemed to come from a higher class. That the lycées were popular can also be attributed to the fact that the
government established no less than 150 scholarships per lycée for boarders. Such pupils were known as élèves nationaux and were principally the sons of directors of
businesses, judges and soldiers.
Neither in the écoles centrales, nor in the lycées, nor in the écoles sécondaires was there any provision for the teaching of
modern languages.[87] De Vroede states that this is probably one of
the reasons for the establishment of so many private schools - institutions and pensionnats where such subjects were on the timetable. The College de Melle under Van Wymelbeke
was one such school.
At the same time, there
was no provision for secondary education for girls. Although religious orders
were forbidden under Napoleon to re-form, many did (albeit illegally) to fill
this lacuna in the educational system.[88]
De Vroede indicates
that there is insufficient evidence on which to estimate the importance of the
private sector at this time, but poses the hypothesis that it was rather
greater than the public.
The law of 3 Brumaire
IV laid down that in each canton one or more écoles primaires should be established. The appointment of the
staff was entrusted to the departmental authorities, and the candidates were to
be examined by an education committee. The philosophy of these schools was to
be that of republicanism, and its ethics were to be taught in place of
religion. The whole matter became a fiasco[89]and governmental plans were thwarted by local
authorities. Few candidates were put forward and, in the years VI to X only 350
primary school teachers were appointed. As a result, although some écoles primaires were full, most had few
or no pupils at all. It was only after the law of 11 Floréal X that primary
education started to grow again, and this can in no small measure be attributed
to the restoration of religious instruction and practice.
Just as is the case
with secondary education, there is little information available concerning
private primary schools. However De Vroede opines that their importance was, in
some regions, greater than that of public primary education. He quotes the
cases of a) the Schelde department where, at the end of 1811, 31.2% of primary
schools were public, and 68.8% private and b) the Hasselt area where in 1817
there were only 41 public primary schools to cover 108 communities.
personnel.
In the French period it
is certain that the number of religious involved in primary education declined,
but there is no evidence as to the extent.[90] As far as lay teachers are concerned a similar
situation existed to that under the Ancien Régime: i.e. that teaching did not
provide a sufficient income on which to live. Frequently, therefore, teaching
was combined with another job, often that of sexton, but also with others such
as:
“...agricultural
workers, casual labourers, bakers, watchmakers, shopkeepers, clerks, tailors,
weavers, gardeners, surveyors, domestic servants, clog makers, smiths,
innkeepers, woodsmen, bricklayers, artists, foresters, village policemen, etc.”[91]
A concluding question:
Did the French period change the structure of education much, or is it better
to speak of continuity?
One thing is clear: no
radically new kinds of educational establishments were founded. Nothing much
changed as far as curriculum was concerned. Only in the écoles centrales was the approach radically revolutionary: in the lycées the clocks were, if anything,
turned back and in the écoles sécondaires
the same broad lines as previously were followed. In the field of primary
education there was nothing new, and it was not until 1812 that any new courses
appeared. Much was planned and embarked upon at the level of organisation but
in fact little changed. (De Vroede says it “fell into the old rut” - viel het terug in de oude plooi.[92])
The formation of the
It was after the
dismemberment of the French Empire, the Treaty of London (
The “Fundamental Law”
promulgated by Willem for
On the
Basing their complaint
on the decree of the 7th March, they brought to the notice of the King that, if
he were to assure to all religions equal favour and protection, which would be
in opposition to the long-standing practice of the Church in the Belgian
provinces, they would oppose it with every energy.
Note that once again,
as was the case under the Austrians, there was the same intolerance of
government toleration.
On the 2nd August, the
Bishop of Gent addressed a pastoral instruction to the clergy and people of his
Diocese in which, having incriminated article 191 (liberty for all religions
guaranteed by the State) and article 196 (all subjects of the King to have
equal opportunity of employment without regard to religious belief) he adds:
“we solemnly protest against these articles ... and we forbid anyone in our
Diocese from following them in any way or under any pretext whatever ...” The
Bishop of Tournai did the same, and the Bishop of Namur saw his instruction
confiscated at the printers, in spite of the freedom of the press demanded by
the law!
On the 18th. August,
the Belgian “notables” met in
The major goal of
Willem was the fusion of
So began to appear the
decrees which would put this into practice. Nobody could have a job any more if
they did not know the Dutch language (30 October 1822); nobody could teach or
be a member of a teaching body without a licence issued by the agents of the
government (February 1824); no Latin school, college or athenaeum could exist
without the express permission of the department of the interior - or they
would be suppressed at the end of September 1824 (1st decree of 14 June); at
Leuven a Collège Philosophique would be established which would accept clerical
students, and the education would be given by three professors named by the
minister of the Interior in consultation with the Archbishop of Malines (2nd
decree of the 14th. June), and nobody would be admitted to Seminaries except
those who had successfully studied at the Collège (11 July). Finally, the
decrees of the
To return to 1815 we
are in the days preceding the Council of Vienna, united to Holland under the
sceptre of Willem van Oranje - “a marriage of convenience” as has been said, in
which the two peoples were not consulted and which lead to a state of permanent
mistrust. The Fundamental Law gave to the King the absolute control of
education. The Bishops and notably Mgr de Broglie protested, but it was in vain.
Come what may, the King, neutral at the outset, succeeded in raising the level
of education. He founded Royal Athenea in the major towns of the country.
Provisionally he allowed the free collèges, generally directed by clergy (e.g.
the Collège d’Alost) to remain open, but submitted them to strict
inspection. For the development of primary education there was, in principle, a
certain freedom. The Dutch government favoured the foundation of community
schools, perfected their programmes and made efforts to better the quality of
the teachers. Everything would have been
fine if Willem had left it there. But
soon, political considerations and religious proselytism compromised his
efforts. The decrees of
The establishment of
the
A decree of 1816
established three state universities,
As far as religious orders
were concerned, a report was drawn up in 1818 on all existing religious
congregations (Van Crombrugghe's first congregation, the Brothers of Mary and Joseph was founded in 1817). Teaching
congregations were forbidden to take final vows.[99] In 1824 all laws concerning education were
applied to teaching congregations, and only those which were approved by the
state were permitted to continue in existence. The final restrictions were
applied by decree of 1825: only those Kolleges
and Athanea having government approval were permitted to continue in
existence, and no-one educated outside the country would be permitted to attend
university in Belgium - this to stem the tide of young men who were being sent
to France for their studies.[100] This decree was suppressed in 1829 as a result
of strong opposition.
In many ways this was
an unhappy union between geographical neighbours.
One of the ways in
which the Dutch government subjugated education was by imposing books of its
own choice. It proposed a double goal: the forced introduction of the Dutch
language and disguised Protestant propaganda. The Dutch society “Tot nut van ‘t
Algemeen” was particularly active in its proselytism, and spread, in
Willem also introduced
well-intentioned measures for the improvement of education, and it was these
measures which were to cause the closure of Van Crombrugghe's Collège d’Alost in 1825.
When the Belgian revolution broke out in August 1830 and attempts to quell it
by armed force had failed Willem appealed to the great powers to help him but
no help was forthcoming. Even after Leopold of Saxe-Coburg was installed as
King of Belgium the Dutch army made a further invasion of
So, then, we have an
historical overview, particularly from the educational point of view, of
It was into this arena
that Van Crombrugghe stepped and within which his educational work started to
develop.
Since the publication of the M. Phil.
thesis in 1997 a new book[103] has been published which gives further helpful insights into the
educational background to the period of Van Crombrugghe’s work. This following
section relies on information from that book[104].
To trace the beginning of Van
Crombrugghe's educational heritage it is necessary firstly to trace the major
lines of the development of the classical humanist education in
At an earlier period, in the fifteenth century, what we
would now call secondary schools were in fact integrated with universities and
initially simply provided lodgings for the university students. As time went past the colleges became more
than just lodgings and ultimately became the places where lectures and tuition
in the faculty of arts were given. Over an even longer timescale the colleges
gradually became independent from the universities and began to offer tuition
in their own right. The tuition which was given was at the level of the first
two stages of the literary and philosophical course offered by the university.
On the one hand instruction was given in Latin grammar, the first stage, and on
the other hand syntax, poetry and Latin rhetoric which were the second stage.
The third stage, that of philosophy, was given at the University itself.
Completion of the third stage led to the award of the degree of bachelor.
In towns and cities where there was no University the
colleges themselves were only able to offer the first two stages and therefore
students had to move to the nearest
Into the sixteenth century in many smaller towns the
municipal authorities made efforts to establish their own secondary colleges
which would produce a bourgeois elite of the type necessary for the furtherance
of the developing middle class; lawyers, clerks, doctors etc. The colleges also
contributed to the development of a new elite which Grootaers classes as the
Liberal bourgeoisie, the very class from
which Van Crombrugghe was born[105]. At the same time the municipal authorities had
to find teachers, hopefully inexpensive ones, in order to ensure of the future
of the colleges. Many of these authorities were able to fill their needs by
offering the direction of their colleges to the Jesuits; the Jesuits having had
the experience of working in universities. As a result of this it came about
that, all over
What for the reasons for the success of the Jesuit
colleges? For Grootaers the principal reason was that the Jesuits had
elaborated a coherent and original model of education: the Ratio Studiorum.
This Ratio was promulgated in
"the cultivated
individual thanks to his acquired familiarity with classical authors, sacred as
well as profane, the critical individual who uses his reason and reflects in an
independent manner."[109]
Grootaers also notes:
" the cultural
humanist model is based on the mastering of the Latin language. This signifies
at the same time a technical mastery of complex linguistic code and a cultural
familiarity with the thoughts of the writers. In other words the notion of
language signifies both a linguistic form and a basis for civilisation."[110]
The Ratio Studiorum, however, is not content with affirming
this basic principle of humanism, that is, the mastering of language; its
translates it into a curriculum which became uniform for all colleges and which
involved a succession of stages. The idea of organising pupils into classes of
different levels is an innovation which the Jesuits inherited from the
Hieronymites, also known as the Brothers of the Common Life[111]. What the Jesuits did to improve on the model
suggested by the Brothers was to integrate it into a curriculum and a programme
of studies which was precise and systematic. The principal point of originality
in the Ratio Studiorum, according to Grootaers, is the fact that Jesuit education
was to a degree personalised. This, at the time, was most unusual. Jesuit
education was adapted to the psychological characteristics of the pupils and to
the age. It also aimed to stimulate personal activity on the part of the pupils
and to limit, to a certain degree, direct and impersonal teaching[112]. Jesuit education recognises each one of the
pupils as a complete individual. Furthermore, the Ratio Studiorum added to this
individual intellectual progress a concern for the complete education of the
person, integrating religious and moral aspects (Christian education) as well
as the physical dimension (importance of sport and recreation) and artistic
(the place given to music and drama[113]).
For a long time, the Jesuit model was applied in a boarding
situation, even if, in urban colleges, half boarders were accepted. In the
boarding schools the boarders were organised into different tables according to
the amount of the parents paid. This model was replicated in Van Crombrugghe’s
schools[114].
Under the Austrian regime in the
“most carefully
prepared, as they are to demonstrate to a sceptical and frequently hostile
populace the excellence of the pedagogical methods approved by the government.[116]”
There were financial consequences to these reforms. The
Jesuit colleges and those of other congregations, with the exception of the
Augustinians, offered free education. This did not mean, however, that
everybody could afford to send their children to Jesuit colleges. It has been
noted above that in the main Jesuit colleges were boarding schools, and, in
effect, the boarding fees limited access to these colleges. The Theresian
reforms of 1777 effectively abolished free education, imposing universal fees
but, at the same time, providing a considerable number of scholarships and
bursaries. By this means the Austrian government hoped to be able to control
the intake of the colleges and, in particular, to restrict access to these
colleges of pupils not belonging to the bourgeoisie. As a result of these
restrictive measures the number of pupils attending the colleges during this
period diminished.
The Royal Colleges existed side by side with the old
colleges and were, in fact, in competition with them. However, broadly
speaking, parents preferred to continue sending their children to the old
colleges. The Austrian government decided to combat this tendency by making the
Royal College of Brussels, where preference for the old colleges (and
especially the
Although reference has been made to the use of lay teachers
in the Royal Colleges, one should not overestimate the degree to which this
"laicisation" actually occurred.
The overall position was that lay teachers only constituted some 40% of
secondary teachers, many College principals were secular priests, and it
remained the case that many teachers were members of Religious Congregations[119].
During the French period, which lasted from 1794 to 1815,
there was a further strengthening of the power of central government in the
reform of the structures and curricula of the humanities. In a radical manner the French authorities
set about dismantling the old system, and especially, in 1796, the involvement
of the Religious Congregations in education.
In fairly short order, the classical humanities ceased to exist, as did
colleges directed by Religious Congregations. Even the Royal Colleges of the
Austrian period were rapidly suppressed.
The Royal Colleges were replaced by "écoles
centrales", or "central schools" whose programmes of study were
inspired by the Encyclopaedists. This new programme gave priority to the
teaching of French, Mathematics and Science, but retained an initiation into
Greek and Latin culture. Each two year stage was given over to one particular
area of knowledge: the first to Natural History and the classical Languages;
the second to Mathematics and Experimental Science; the third to
Belles-Lettres, History and Legislation[120].
The programme followed by the central schools was also
underpinned by a reform of pedagogical methods, giving importance to intuition,
observation and experimentation. For this reason each school had to have a
natural history garden, Physics and Chemistry laboratories, natural history
museums and a library.
For the Revolutionary French, education had to be totally
under the control of the State. Just as, under the previous, Austrian, regime
the reality of the situation did not necessarily correspond with the theory, so
it was also with the French. From 1794 to the beginning of the first Empire in
1802 the State was unable to finance its desired initiatives in the field of
education. This meant that in fact the real power in education remained at the
level of local government or in the hands of private initiative. After the
Concordat of 1802 central government recognised the reality of the situation
and allowed some control to be officially in the hands of the above agencies.
Between 1797 and 1802 the revolutionary government insisted
that all teachers should be Republicans and therefore anti-religious. Following
the decree of 1797 all teachers had to take an "oath of hatred" and
teach the "Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen" (decree
of 1798)[121].
From 1802, however, the role of the Church in secondary
education came once more to the fore, and the clergy were able once more to
take up the direction of secondary schools whose teaching staffs were a mixture
of priests and laymen. The new curriculum of the Encyclopaedists also fell out
of favour and the old model of humanities with the absolute priority of Latin
and Greek returned. Religious Instruction also returned to the programme.
Why did both the Austrian and French reforms fail? For Grootaers
it would seem that in both cases the "new" schools were patronised
either by the allies of each new regime, or by minor functionaries seeking to
attain an upward social mobility. The traditional elites continued to patronise
traditional colleges, either in
The Dutch period
(1815 to 1830), continued the process of reform, but in a rather less radical
manner. The insistence on Latin and on Greek, so beloved of the classical
humanities, maintained its position whilst at the same time modern subjects
such as Modern Languages, History and Geography were given an important
place. The Dutch government did,
however, attempt to continue the process of centralisation of control of
education which the Austrians and the French had set in motion. It was this
whole question of State control of education which led to the alliance of the
Catholics and the Liberals in 1830 and the successful attempt, in which Van
Crombrugghe was fully involved, to have the freedom of education inscribed in
the new Belgian constitution. One way in which the Church attempted to get
around Dutch legislation was that the Catholic Bishops opened a new type of
secondary education institution: the Minor Seminaries. In theory these institutions were designed to
prepare potential priests for the Major
Seminaries. In fact a considerable
number of the pupils had no ecclesiastical vocation whatsoever, and the
development of the Minor Seminaries continued without any reference to the
Dutch government at all. This was another area of potential conflict, as the
Dutch did not recognise the freedom of education as a constitutional principle.
On the contrary, Dutch law demanded that public education should be " un
objet constant des soins du gouvernement". In 1816 the organisation of
post primary education was confided to the state approved universities,
community colleges and Athenea. For the
moment the Seminaries were tolerated.
However, in 1825 all institutions of secondary education which had been
organised with out the Kings permission, for the most part Catholic
institutions, were closed, thereby giving the monopoly of secondary education
to those colleges and Athenea which were already under strict government
control. It was at the same moment that the King also intervened in the
formation of future priests by the establishment of the "collège
philosophique" at
It should not be
thought that this new, legalised freedom of education immediately introduced a
"brave new world" in
In the immediate wake of Belgian independence in 1831 a
special commission was set up to investigate the situation of secondary
education in Belgium and to come up with the plan which would have as its aim
to give to the State a primary role in its organisation whilst at the same time
respecting the constitutional principle of the freedom of education. The
commission would establish the subjects which were to be taught and would also
lay down the timetable of classes. It was the work of this commission which
would lead to the first law on secondary education which was promulgated on
"Secondary
education in State colleges (or Athenea) will be organised according to one
model having the double goal of preparing young people for academic study and
to give such knowledge as may be useful to those who are destined for business,
the arts, and industry.[123]"
So in these Athenea two sections were established: the one
being orientated towards University (“section des humanités anciennes”), the
other towards careers in industry, business and the arts (“section
professionnelle”). This second section
was instituted by the law of 1850 and was re-baptised the “section des
humanités modernes” by a Royal decree of
A further educational distinction was made by the law of
1850. The two major sections noted above were named "type long" or,
more fully "enseignement moyen du degré superieur ou du premier
degré", and would only be given in the Athenea. A further educational
type, the "type court" or "enseignement moyen du degré inférieur
ou du second degré", would be given in the "écoles moyennes" or
secondary schools which developed from the superior primary schools instituted
by the Dutch government as well from the commercial schools which had been
created in a certain number of towns[125].
In short, the law of 1850 saw secondary education as being
divided into two social classes, rather along the lines of Grammar Schools and
Secondary Modern schools in post-war England. Whilst this might be seen as
being socially divisive, it did in fact mean the introduction of secondary
education for a whole social class who would otherwise have been denied it[126].
"I believe that
it is a great good to give an adequate education to a large number of young
people who belong to almost yet modest families who, today colour are not able
to receive an appropriate education for their station and their needs, which
has sometimes meant that they have had to go elsewhere in search of education
with the result that sometimes they have become useless or dangerous citizens.
The secondary schools are aimed at making of these children honest bourgeois,
honest partisans, and competent cultivators, satisfied with their
situation."
In spite of all the changes of regime the model of the
humanities which had been inherited from the Jesuit colleges of the 16th and
seventeenth centuries continued, not only through the Catholic colleges which
have continued through to the 21st century, but also through, and
therefore in spite of, the various state initiatives which have been listed
above; the Austrian Royal Colleges, the Napoleonic Lycées and the Dutch
Athenea.
The contribution of the newly independent
On the one hand there was a search for continuity in that
the classical humanities, with their insistence on Greek and Latin, remained at
the highest centre of the State Athenea, albeit modernised by some of the
Austrian and Dutch reforms: teaching the native language, a second language,
History and Geography.
On the other hand the law of 1850 introduced two radical
novelties. The first of these novelties, as has been noted above, consisted in
a doubling of the scope of the humanities by the creation of a second string
whose more utilitarian orientation clearly marked it as separate from the
classical humanities. This was a radical move indeed, since a definition of the
single stranded classical humanities lay in their disinterested character.
Radical also was the fact that in this second string, which after 1887 became
called "modern humanities", Latin and Greek were characterised as
"dead" languages and replaced by "living" languages.
The second novelty was introduction of the
"short" programme of secondary education. In fact, a
"lesser" programme of secondary education had de facto existed for
some time in those towns which had neither the opportunity nor the finance to
support an institution offering the "long" programme. It was only be
in 1850 that institutions offering only the "short" programme were
given official status within the Belgian educational system.
Although Van
Crombrugghe and the Josephites did not remained involved in primary education
for long, in order to understand what was happening in legislation for
secondary education in
The revolution of 1830
had brought about an alliance between the Catholics and the Liberals which was
to present a strong front against the Dutch regime of William the First. Once
the new
At this point education
in State primary schools was tied to Catholic doctrine so that the Church was
able to control the moral and religious climate of the schools; there was no
objection to this from the Liberals. In the period between the establishment of
The law of 23rd
September1842 was the last occasion on which there would be a compromise
between the Catholics and the Liberals. The Liberals were satisfied because the
law recognised that the civil power had the rights to organise education. The
Catholics were satisfied because the Catholic religion remained at the basis of
education. The primary schools were obliged to organise religion lessons,
control of which was exercised by the Catholic Church.
Each commune was
obliged to establish, either alone or in conjunction with neighbouring
communes, at least one primary school. If there were already sufficient free
schools in the area these could be adopted by the commune. They would however
become subject to the law. Each commune was to allocate a percentage of local
taxes to fund primary education, including bursaries for needy children and, if
local funds were insufficient, the provincial or central governments could be
approached for subsidies.
A double system of
inspection was established: a civil inspection and a Diocesan inspection. The
Catholic Church, as well as the Protestant Synod and the Jewish Consistory, had
the right to inspect the teaching of religion and morals in those State schools
where the majority of the pupils were of that religion[127].
This happy relationship
between the Catholics and the Liberals was not destined to last. The Catholics
had hoped that the conditions of the law would transform the State schools into
centres of Catholic education. The Liberals saw education in much broader terms
and sought a much firmer control of education that the situation envisaged by
the law allowed. They sought to limit the power of the Church, to reinforce the
significance of the civil inspection, and to reduce the control exercised by
local communes.
It seemed impossible to
resolve the situation by legislation one way or another since neither party had
an overwhelming majority in the government. It was not until the arrival of the
solidly Liberal government of June 1878, beyond the scope of this thesis, that
decisive moves could be made: the full application of the 1842 law and the
establishment of a Ministry of Education. It also saw a weakening in the notion
of the freedom of education for which Van Crombrugghe had fought so hard at the
National Congress. One particular
sentence in the Royal Decree of 1878 gives a clear idea of the intentions of
the new government:
"Education given
at State expense must be under the exclusive direction and supervision of the
State.”[128]
It would be wrong to consider
Van Crombrugghe and the Josephites without an attempt to posit Van Crombrugghe’s thought
in the context of the Jesuits who had for so long and so strongly influenced
education in
“The Jesuits remain
grateful to him (Van Crombrugghe) because he forms a golden link between the
old and the new
- and again:
“Van Crombrugghe was a
living link between the Ratio Studiorum of 1586 and the education which the
Jesuits since
1831 until now, for 150 years, have maintained and applied to differing
circumstances.”[130]
Before looking at
Ignatuis and the Jesuits some
consideration has to be given to their forerunners. This line can tentatively
be traced back to the Brethren of the Common Life, making them possibly the
earliest “ancestors” of Van Crombrugghe and the Josephites.
The Brethren of the
Common Life were founded in
“In these schools,
Christian education was placed high above mere learning and the training of the
young in practical religion and active piety was considered the most important
duty. ..... the pupils learned to look upon religion as the basis of all human
existence and culture, while at the same time they had a good supply of secular
knowledge imparted to them and they gained a genuine love for learning and
study.”[133]
These are certainly
characteristics which form a common thread linking the Brethren of the Common
Life, the Jesuits and the
Josephites and
which, 500 years later, would find a place at the centre of Van Crombrugghe's thought.
As their influence
spread further, the Brethren were invited by John Standonch, doctor of the
Sorbonne, to establish themselves in the Collège
de Montaigne in the
“..... this much is
certain, that Ignatius had imbibed the spirit of the Brethren from the study of
the works of Thomas à Kempis.”[136]
Later, as the
educational work of the Jesuits spread
over
At the time that Loyola was a
student at the
“It was fallen from
its ancient splendour. The bounds of discipline had been gradually relaxed;
studies were abandoned; and with masters, as with scholars, all love of letter,
and respect for the rule, had given place to sombre passions, to political
hate, to religious fanaticism and dissolute habits.”[140]
It was this very moral
decline which, according to Hughes, led Loyola to enter
the field of education at all.
“For we may say with
confidence that, if the Universities of the sixteenth century were still doing
the work which originally they had been chartered to do, the founder of the
Society of Jesus would not only have omitted to draw out his system as an
improvement for them, and as an improvement on them, but he would have done,
what he always did with anything good in existence; he would have used what he
found, and have turned his attention to other things more urgent.”[141]
The educational
question, therefore, for Loyola was one
of moral regeneration rather than of radical innovation - just as it was for
Van Crombrugghe.
In 1584 Father Claudius
Aquaviva, the fifth General of the Society, called together six Jesuit
teachers, each from a different nationality and Jesuit province, in order to
formalise a universal system which might be put into practice wherever the
Society might be at work. For a year they studied pedagogical works, examined
regulations of colleges and universities, and weighed the observations and
suggestions made by prominent Jesuit educators. Their report was submitted to
Aquaviva in 1585 and, in 1586, was distributed to the various provinces: the
report was to be studied and returned with comments to
“The Ratio Studiorum is a plan of studies which admits of every
legitimate progress and perfection, and what Ignatius said of the Society in
general may be applied to its system of studies in particular, namely that it
ought to be suit itself to the times and comply with them, and not make the
times suit themselves to it.”[144]
Right from the
beginning of the Ratio, in the
initial report of the six Jesuits who drew
it up, we see the statement of a priority that was to form the backbone of
Jesuit education and which would permeate through into Van Crombrugghe:
“The six Fathers, who
drew it up, state, in their introduction, that there are two mainstays and
supports of the Society of Jesus, “an ardent pursuit of piety and an eminent
degree of learning," ardens pietatis studium et proestans rerum scientia.
If piety is not illumined with the light of learning, it can be, no doubt, of
great use to the person who possesses it, but of scarcely any use in the service
of the Church and of one's neighbour, in the administration of the Word and of
the Sacraments, in the education of youth, in controversies with those who are
hostile to the faith, in giving counsel, answering doubts, and in all other
offices and functions, which are proper to men of the Order.”[145]
And again reminiscent
of Van Crombrugghe, the first Rule of the Ratio
states that it is one of the most important obligations of the Society .[146]
Private Talks
“ ..... to teach all
branches of learning in such a manner that men should be led to the knowledge
and love of their Creator and Redeemer.”[147]
The question of the
actual origin and sources of the Ratio
are a topic of debate. There has been some speculation that it was modelled
chiefly on the theories of the Spanish Humanist, Luis Vives[148] or on the plan of John Sturm.[149] [150] As Schwickerath notes, no such dependence has
been proved, and there are other sources
which can be pinpointed. The same refutation is made by Curtis & Boultwood
(1965) who explain the apparent similarities by the fact that Sturm had studied
in the school of the Brethren of the Common Life at Liège, and Vives, whom
Loyola met in
Brugge, had spent many years in the
The Ratio is considered by some to be the
Jesuits’ greatest contribution to education, but its
importance lies in organisation and method rather than that of theory,[155] and in a system which has stood the test of
time.
“So comprehensive,
systematic and exhaustive are the regulations that the modern reader is
inclined to forget that the Ratio Studiorum is one of the first attempts on
record at educational organisation, management and method, at a time when it
was unusual even to grade pupils in classes: and one is tempted to compare it,
not always to the disadvantage of the Ration, with the regulations of a modern
school system which have only after some generations been evolved and
perfected”.[156]
The Ratio Studiorum is not the only
essential Jesuit pedagogical document. The General Assembly of the Society in
1696-7 passed a resolution that:
“ ..... besides the
rules whereby the masters of literature are directed in the manner of teaching,
they should be provided with an Instruction and proper Method of Learning, and
so be guided in their private studies even while they are teaching.”[157]
The person entrusted
with this work was Joseph de Jouvancy[158], who, five years previously had published a
work (Christianis Litterarum Magistris de
Ratione Discendi et Docendi - Paris 1691) which was deemed capable of
adaptation into the Method which the Society needed. In 1703, based on the
above work, an authorised handbook for Jesuit teachers was published by
Jouvancy, entitled Magistris Scholarum
Inferiorum Societatis Jesu de Ratione Discendi et Docendi,[159] published at
Latin is and remains
the central point of instruction, even though Greek and the historical branches
are not neglected
The art of the teacher
may be separated into two main divisions
By the example of his
own piety and virtue the teacher is to lead the pupil to the knowledge and
service of the Creator,
He is to bring the
pupil to apply himself to his actual studies by fear of humiliation and an
honourable spirit of competition.[160]
Jouvancy’s work was praised by, among others,
Rollin and Voltaire.
One of the methods
employed in stimulating competition were the so-called concertationes or contests. This spirit of competition was used by
the enemies of the Jesuits as a
point of discredit: Compayré, for example, states that this “fostering of
ambition” was “the characteristic of the corrupt Jesuitical morality.”[161] Even Quintilian admits that the ambition
engendered by competition may be a vice:
“He will think it
disgraceful to be surpassed by pupils of his age, and a fine thing to have
beaten his seniors. All these things stimulate the mind, and though ambition
may in itself be a vice none the less it is frequently the source of virtues.” [162]
On the contrary, what
was demanded by the Ratio was honesta
aemulatio, good and noble emulation. According to Ribadeneira:
"Many means are
devised, and exercises employed, to stimulate the minds of the young -
assiduous disputation, various trials of genius, prizes offered for excellence
in talent and industry. These prerogatives and testimonies of virtue vehemently
arouse the minds of students, awake them even when sleeping, and, when they are
aroused and are running on with a good will, impel them and spur them on
faster. For, as penalty and disgrace bridle the will and check it from pursuing
evil, so honour and praise quicken the sense wonderfully, to attain the dignity
and glory of virtue."[163]
He quotes Cicero and
Quintilian to the same effect. Hughes also notes that this “was not to develop
a false self-love in young hearts”. Indeed the oldest code of school rules in
the Jesuits, probably written by Peter Canisius, states:
"Let them root
out from themselves, in every possible way, self-love and the craving for vain
glory"[164]
Schwickerath cites
various methods of competition
individual, whereby
each pupil has his own aemulus or
rival
dividing the class into
“sides”;
competitions between
classes.[165]
For Jouvancy (as later
for Van Crombrugghe) is was important that the teacher should have authority:
three things are important for a teacher in achieving authority; esteem,
love, and fear.[166]
Esteem: The teacher must possess the esteem of his
pupils, i.e. they must respect him for his learning and his character. Many of
the traits noted by Schwickerath as being non-conducive to esteem are echoed in
Van Crombrugghe: they are:
“ ..... passionate or
irritable behaviour, abusive language, haughtiness, levity, whims, fickleness,
inconsiderate or idle talk .....”[167]
Affection: The teacher must strive to gain the affection
of his pupils.[168] He will do this by being seen to be eager for
his pupils’ advancement. He must be friendly and kind towards all, avoiding
partiality, favouritism and excessive familiarity towards individuals. In
punishing he must be considerate, just, moderate, and show that he acts only
from a sense of duty and genuine love, not from passion or antipathy. Jouvancy
insists that the teacher should “display the earnestness of a father and the
devotion of a mother”. We see this notion duplicated by Van Crombrugghe in the
closing paragraph of the Guide
Pédagogique:
“In a word, be like
fathers to them, and that's not enough; be like mothers. You must love the
children and make them feel that you love them; not only by avoiding, in your
dealings with them, all hardness, unjust coldness and discouraging severity,
but by caring tenderly for them and having a blessed and cordial affection for
them; letting them see that you have devoted your life to them, that you are
happy to be with them and will always be so. You must also identify with them,
not only in work and study, but in everything else and in every detail of their
school life.”
Fear: This third element is described by Jouvancy[169] as timor
reverentialis as opposed to timor
servilis, i.e. the fear borne of reverence rather than the fear of a slave.
The qualities necessary on the part of the teacher to instil this “good” fear
are gravity, firmness and prudent consistency: on the part of the school, only
few and wise regulations should be made - a point also made by Van Crombrugghe - and
these must be consistently enforced.
In the Règlement des Maîtresses which Van
Crombrugghe wrote for the Daughters of Mary and Joseph we find a very precise
description of the authoritative teacher:
“To do good for her
pupils the mistress must necessarily have authority over them. To obtain this
authority she must have their esteem (which she will get) if she truly loves
them, if she frequently gives them signs of her affection and if she inspires
in them a positive ideal of piety, knowledge and character. She should have a
gentle and modest manner, and open and smiling face, polished and unforced
manners, but with no trace of pedantry; a firmness of character which remains
always in control, a great exactitude in doing everything at the indicated time
..... This is what will infallibly assure you general esteem and a directly
resulting authority over your pupils.”[170]
All the above should not suggest that
punishments are unnecessary and, indeed, a number of references are made to it.[171] However, offences must be treated with
compassion and without harshness. The teacher must never be hasty in punishing
and often it will be best to wait and assign the punishment later. The Ratio Studiorum says also that the teacher should not be too
eager to discover occasions for punishing his pupils[172] and that any good reasons for pardoning, or lessening the
punishment, are to welcomed.
“Let not the Prefects
consider their authority to consist in this, that the students are on hand in
obedience to their nod, their every word, or their very look; but in this, that
the boys love them, approach with confidence, and make their difficulties
known.”[173]
Schwickerath notes that
it was customary, and laid down by the Ratio
Studiorum, that the teacher should not always remain teaching at the same
level except in the last two years. By this method a teacher would remain with
a particular class for a number of years and thereby:
“ ..... master and
pupil understand each other, and if the teacher is a good religious and a
fairly efficient teacher, he will have won the esteem, the affection and the
confidence of the pupils, all of which gives him inestimable advantages for the
real and thorough education of his charges.”[174]
Is this the same thing
as Van Crombrugghe means
when he speaks of politesse in the
context of authority and discipline? Probably not entirely, but it is
intimately connected with discipline both in the Jesuit and the Constantian
contexts. The most important factor is the teacher’s example: he must appear as
a “perfect gentleman”.[175] Schwickerath speaks of a
“ ..... politeness
which is the choice fruit and exterior manifestation of solid interior virtue,
of sincerity of heart, humility, obedience and charity”.[176]
In the Jesuit context,
then, what is the difference between a system of education built on
Christianity and one built on another philosophy? For Schwickerath:
Contests & Competition
“The most essential
difference will be that in a Christian system the intellectual training is
considered secondary and subordinate to the moral and religious training,
whereas all other systems aim at a purely secular education, and in this again
lay special stress on the intellectual to the neglect of moral training.”[177]
In establishing the
aims of Christian education the life and teaching of Jesus Christ cannot be
ignored. Christ is quoted as saying
“Seek ye first the Kingdom of God and His justice.”[178] This, then, must form the foundation of all
educational principles because, the argument goes on, “what does it profit a
man if he gain the whole world and suffer the loss of his own soul?”[179] Continuing Schwickerath’s argument, if “the
fear of God is the beginning of all wisdom”[180] [181]then the moral and religious training of the
young must come first in the eyes of the Christian teacher. The following distinctions
are made:
Greek education
affected only the intellect (nous );
Christian education
affects the soul (pneuma), as contrasted with the body (sarx)
dividing the class into
“sides”;
competi"
Pagan education aimed
at mere formation (Ausbildung) - the
evolution and development of the natural man;
Christian education
aims at transformation (Umbildung) - at
change, at elevation.[182]
If the Christian has to
follow Christ’s command of “deny
yourself, take up your cross and follow me” he has to go against the natural
inclinations of man and therefore this Umbildung noted by Willmann is necessary. Referring to Kempis’ Imitation of Christ with which we know
Ignatius was familiar[183] one can see that the Christian teacher has in
mind always that “when Christ, our Master, comes for the final examination, he
will not ask how well we spoke and disputed, but how well we lived.[184]
Private talks with
pupils are recommended by the Ratio.
According to Jouvancy, the teacher should speak in private more often to those
who seem to be exposed to worse and more dangerous faults. The Jesuit Sacchini
remarks that the teacher should study the character and disposition of each
pupil, to “discover the bad outcroppings on the tender plant and to nip them in
the bud”.[185] This element of keeping in touch with the
individual pupil has been considered to be one of the sources of the Jesuits’ success in education, a fact recognised even
by non-Catholic commentators. Schwickerath cites Sir Josua Fitch, writing about
the great Arnold, of Rugby:
“Much of the influence
he gained over his scholars, influence which enabled him to dispense in an
increasing degree with corporal punishment, was attributed to his knowledge of
the individual characteristics of his boys. .....this is a kind of knowledge
which has long been known to be characteristic of the disciplinary system of
the Jesuits, but has not been common among the head masters
of English public schools.”[186]
Schwickerath notes that
among other charges laid against the Jesuits was that
of estranging children from their families by making them boarders. He quotes
Compayré: “The ideal of the perfect (Jesuit) scholar is to forget his parents”.[187] In fact the Jesuits opened boarding schools
unwillingly and only where absolutely necessary, preferring day schools since
they esteemed the influence which a good home had on the training of the child.
It is noted, for example, that of the 83 Colleges which the Society ran in
Germany in 1710, only 12 admitted boarders.[188] This is in contrast to Van Crombrugghe who
regarded boarding as a positive factor in education - probably, once again, as
a result of his experience at Amiens.
Another stark contrast
between the Jesuits and Van
Crombrugghe was that in Van Crombrugghe's career there was a propensity for
accepting foundations with a very small number of men at his disposal. The
Jesuits, on the other had, were careful not to do so and it was Laynez[189] in 1564 who laid down that the Jesuits would
not accept the running of a College unless it had a foundation for twenty
Jesuits.[190]
When the Jesuits were
suppressed the running of many of their colleges was entrusted either to lay
organisations or to other religious congregations. This was, however, not
without its problems, both financial and educational. It is noted that, for
example, the Jesuit College of Saint-Yves in Vannes, Brittany, directing some
1,200 pupils with a faculty of approximately 22 Jesuits, existed on an income
of 6,000 livres a year. When the Jesuits were suppressed and had to be replaced
by laymen, it was discovered that the salaries alone of just 10 teachers would
mount to 11,000 livres a year.[191]
One order which benefited more than many from
the suppression of the Jesuits was the
Oratory. If the Jesuits were international in scope, the Oratory were a
particularly French order. They should not be confused with the Oratory of St
Philip Neri, or the “Italian” Oratory, which had been founded some years
previously. The “French” Oratory was founded by Pierre de Bérulle (1575-1629)
in 1611. By 1716 they ran thirty-six colleges in France, and a further seven
Jesuit colleges were handed over to them after the expulsion of the Jesuits.
They had their own Ratio Studiorum published in 1634 and 1645.[192] The Oratory were originally exempted from the
suppression of the religious Orders after the French Revolution, but were
finally suppressed in 1792.[193] It is noted that after the suppression of the
Jesuits:
“The municipal officers
of the cities, the bureaux themselves hastened to petition the King, that their
colleges might be conceded to religious communities. Thus it was that the greater part of the old Jesuit
colleges fell into the hands of the Benedictines and
Bernardines, of the Carmelites and Minims, of Jacobins and Cordeliers, of Capuchins and Recollects,
of Doctrinaires and Barnabites, and above all, of the Oratorians. But all these Religious, except the
Oratorians, fell far short of the Jesuits. The greater part had not even any idea of
teaching, etc."[194]
In our own times the Jesuits, like the Josephites, have been questioning their educational
identity in changing circumstances. A number of their findings have been quoted
in the Introduction to this thesis, but it would be as well to dwell on a
number of features which contemporary Jesuits continue to regard as
fundamental, and which show a continuing parallel to those elements which
enthused Van Crombrugghe.
Firstly,
“Any attempt to speak
of Jesuit education today must take account of the profound changes which have
influenced and affected this education - since the time of Ignatius but
especially during the present century.” [195]
This, of course, is
true also of the Josephites just as
is:
“ ..... many other
developments have affected concrete details of school life and have altered
fundamental school policies ...... A common spirit lies behind pedagogy,
curriculum and school life, even though these may differ greatly from those of
previous centuries, and the more concrete details of school life may differ
greatly from country to country.” [196]
This “common spirit” is
not left undefined.
“The objective of
Jesuit education is to assist in the fullest possible development of all the
God-given talents of each individual person as a member of the human
community.” [197]
More recently the
former Superior General of the Society of Jesus, Father Peter-Hans Kolvenbach,
expressed the same purpose in very similar words:
“Our ideal is the
well-rounded person who is intellectually competent, open to growth, religious,
loving and committed to doing justice in generous service to the people of
God.” [198]
Such an objective,
whilst being claimed as Jesuit, is distinctive rather than unique; it could as
well be applied as essential to any Roman Catholic or even broadly Christian
school and would certainly be at the foundation of the philosophy of a school
in the Constantian tradition.
In the same way, the
Jesuits underline
the importance of the personal and caring relationship between teacher and
individual pupil which Josephites would
also recognise as being characteristic.
“Growth in the
responsible use of freedom is facilitated by the personal relationship between
student and teacher ..... cura personalis (concern for the individual person)
remains a basic characteristic of Jesuit education.” [199]
And from a different
source, Fr Kolvenbach again:
'This care for each student
individually, as far as this is possible, remains and must remain the
characteristic of our vocation.... Above all, we need to maintain, in one way
or in another, this personal contact with each of the students in our schools
and colleges.”[200]
Finally, and it could
equally well be Van Crombrugghe himself saying this:
“..... education takes
place in a moral context: knowledge is joined to virtue” [201]
Van Crombrugghe did not, at any stage of his
life, publish a fully elaborated “method” or thorough codification of his
educational ideals on the scale of that which is found for the Jesuits in the Ratio Studiorum, although we do have two
smaller documents, the Règlement du
Collège d’Alost and the Règlement des Professeurs. It would be
useless to attempt to compare these documents with the Ratio: although there are points of similarity the scope is on an
entirely different scale and, as has been noted, the Ratio is not the work of Ignatius Loyola but
rather the work of early Jesuits. We do
have two other documents which help to illuminate the Founder’s educational
stance, but these are works of compilation undertaken by early Josephites and based
on the Founder’s letters, exhortations and Chapter decisions: the Guide Pédagogique[202] and the
Directoire des Surveillants.[203] Although throughout his life he was in contact
by letter with members of the Congregations he formed, what he says in many of
those cases are simply reactions to, or solutions for, a particular set of
circumstances or problems.
As far as methods per se are concerned Van Crombrugghe had
this to say:
“We have the greatest
interest concerning methods, in not remaining behind; everything is moving, we
must also move forward.”[204]
and again:
“As far as methods in
general are concerned, not being enslaved to any one method, we will not reject
any type of improvement merely because it is a novelty. Nevertheless we will
distrust the mania for changes, for experiments, especially those wonderful
schemes for which even the advertisements are not always free from charlatanism
..... Finally, in order always to be useful our Institute, making itself all
things to all men, will modify its means of action according to the new needs
of society. Such will in all ages be our great rule concerning methods.”[205]
To find any form of
elaboration of Van Crombrugghe’s philosophy of education the most powerful
sources date from early on in his educational career. In particular one would
have to look at those sources which date from his time as Headmaster of the Collège d’Alost (1814-1825): the “Règlement du Collège d’Alost” and the
text of two speeches given to parents at prize distributions in Easter and
Summer 1815.
In many ways the Règlement du Collège d'Alost is an
uninteresting document for the purposes of this current research, as it
consists in the main simply of practical instructions and dispositions for the
running of the school. Many of the practical considerations, timetable etc.,
were probably taken from an already existing Diocesan Rule. However, occasional
explanations and reasonings give us an insight into what Van Crombrugghe
thought, or at least into those thoughts of which Van Crombrugghe approved
enough to have them enshrined in “his” rule.
The rule opens with
what we would now call the “mission statement” of the school:
“The goal which is
established for this house is to cultivate at one and the same time the minds
and hearts of young people. One cannot succeed in this important purpose
without order and method”[206]
Garcia notes[207]that this section was taken directly from the
diocesan rule, but four key notions in Van Crombrugghe’s thought are here
present: mind, heart, order and method.
Another cental, Jesuit
inspired element of Van Crombrugghe’s thought enters at Section 3, number 5:
that of competition. In order to encourage the pupils in their efforts, and
publicly to reward those who had done well, there were to be:
“On Wednesday
mornings - proclamation of class positions. On the nearest Thursday to the 1st
of each month this takes place in public and medals for diligence are
distributed”[208]
Van Crombrugghe would
have found the justification for these public recognitions of the results of
competition in Quintilian:
“There is one useful
method known to me, which was employed by my own teachers. They arranged us in
classes, determining the order of speaking according to the ability of the
pupils. Thus as each boy appeared to excel in proficiency he stood higher in
the order of declamation. Tests of progress were held from time to time, and to
earn promotion was a great prize for us, whilst to be head of the class was by
far the most coveted honour. The class order was not decided once for all. Each
month gave the vanquished a fresh opportunity to do battle. Thus those who held
high places through previous success did not relax their efforts, and shame
stirred the less successful to strive to wipe out their disgrace. So far as I
can form a conjecture I would maintain that this rivalry did far more to kindle
our zeal for oratorical studies than the exhortations of teachers, the care of
paedagogi (attendants), and the wishes of our parents.”[209]
Religion, which
underpins everything that Van Crombrugghe later says about education, appears
also:
“The fear of the Lord
is the foundation of wisdom. There is no good education which is not founded on
religion and piety towards God. Since religion is the foundation of the
building on which we are working, it must be and always will be the principal
object of our efforts and of the care we dedicate to our pupils”.[210]
Positions of authority,
equivalent to today’s “prefects”, were held by pupils known as “censeurs”. They were to report minor
misdemeanours to the Housemaster. However, with that trait of mercy which
appears more strongly later in Van Crombrugghe’s work, it is noted that:
“The prefects can
recommend to the Housemaster that later good behaviour be held to negate an
earlier fault”.[211]
Little is made of this
in any of Van Crombrugghe's writings nor by other commentators; we cannot,
therefore, conclude that Van Crombrugghe made use of a “monitorial” system as
such - simply that there were prefects whose qualities were to be similar to
those of the teachers.
Decency is encouraged
amongst the pupils:
“Decency is such a
highly valued virtue that the children must continually watch over themselves
in order to conserve it always; it is the finest decoration of youth”.[212]
and offences against
it, along with civility and, where required - i.e. almost everywhere - silence,
are to be punished.[213]
As well as in the more
formal areas of school life, e.g. classroom, refectory and dormitory,
recreation time is also a moment for careful supervision and for the instilling
of Christian virtues:
“Dangerous games, or
games of chance, cards and physical games (?) are forbidden. Contraventions of
this article will be strictly reprimanded, as will exaggerated familiarity,
provocation, silly names and most especially quarrels.”[214]
An open and caring
attitude to others is encouraged:
“Everyone should take
great pains to be honest towards each other, considerate towards newcomers, and
respectful towards strangers in the house.”[215]
A further article would
seem, on one level, to be aimed against “particular friendships” but can at
another level be seen to be aimed at promoting civility and good manners in
encouraging the pupils to distribute their company equally and without favour:
“During recreation it
is forbidden to spend one’s time exclusively with the same friends. Rather one
spends time equally with others”.[216]
A whole section of the Règlement (Article 9) is given over to politesse which, as we have previously
seen is an essential tenet of Van Crombrugghe’s philosophy. This politesse is extended to the pupils’
teachers;
“The pupils must have
for their teachers all the respect which the benefits they receive from them
deserve. They will, therefore, never speak of them without adding to their name
some respectful expression.”[217]
- to their companions;
“They will become
accustomed to being obliging towards their companions, to pleasing them, and to
never saying anything shocking against anyone.”[218]
- and to strangers;
“They should also be
careful to present themselves before strangers with the respect and seemly
manners which the situation demands.”[219]
Chapter Three of the Règlement is given over to competition (l’émulation) which Van Crombrugghe (in
common with the Jesuit Ratio Docendi) regards
as one the most potent means of encouraging pupils in their work. In the
preamble to the Chapter he states:
“It is more effective
to be led towards what is good through the hope of reward than to be led away
from evil by the fear of punishment.”[220]
A scheme of rewards is
established based on “notes de diligence”,
the accumulation of which leads to further distinction. This system was not
always successful. According to the Règlement,
the pupil who gets the most “notes” in a month is rewarded by a) wearing a
cross on a ribbon and b) eating at table with the Headmaster. This particular
reward was later abolished; an addendum to the Règlement against this article states that it is “to be changed as
it causes mirth!”[221]
At the first possible
moment after his appointment, the Prize Distribution of Easter 1815, Van
Crombrugghe took advantage of the presence of the parents and the “mighty” of
Alost to expound and expand the views on education which had already been
outlined in the Règlement. Later in
the year, at the end of year Prize Distribution, he gave a further speech which
so impressed Bishop de Broglie that he had it edited and printed for
distribution under the title of “Sur
l’Education”. Of the two, the first[222] is the more important source of Van
Crombrugghe’s thought: nowhere else does he give such a detailed and
concentrated exposé of his views. It is therefore worth examining it in some
detail.
“Seeing the dazzling
company which honours us by coming to encourage the efforts of our pupils by
applauding their success, I feel inspired to give a simple exposé of the goals
to which we tend, and the method which we have adopted in order to attain those
goals in this school. The point of perfection at which we have so happily
arrived so rapidly proves the value of our methods and justifies the unusual
degree of trust in which we are held by an enlightened populace. I beg you,
ladies and gentlemen, not to expect from me an elegant and flowery discourse: I
have no ambition to be known as an orator. I have nothing to offer but honesty
and candour. I will attempt to gain your attention only by the importance of
what I want to say.”
One wonders, so soon
(six months) after Van Crombrugghe’s appointment, just how large the company
was seeing that he had taken over a school with only five pupils. We do know,
however, that two years later the number of pupils in the school was two
hundred and sixty eight.[223]
“The education of
young people has at every stage in history been regarded by the greatest
philosophers and the wisest legislators as the true source of happiness of
families, even States and Empires.”
Not only is education
important for the child himself, it is also an essential building block for
society at all levels. In making this statement, Van Crombrugghe leans heavily,
not on his own authority, but on that of writers of past ages. The ideal
expressed would have important consequences for Van Crombrugghe’s participation
in the National Congress of 1830
and his fight for the freedom of education: without a “proper” (in Van
Crombrugghe’s terms) education system the new state of Belgium would be flawed.
“It is well
understood that in order to attain the perfection of which he is capable man
must be cultivated. His most positive attributes will not gain any real value
except through the care he takes to bring them to fruition and the good use
which he learns to make of them.”
For Van Crombrugghe the
child was something incomplete, a “soft wax”[224] (as we will see him refer to the child
elsewhere) into which the imprint of all that was important was to be made
during the process of education.
“It is, thus the role of education to form the
good man and to prepare him to take his place in society; as a consequence it
is its role to form the heart and the mind of the young, to bring to perfection
their reason and to embellish their imagination.”
This is an important
paragraph as it contains a distillation of Van Crombrugghe's views on
education. The child is not solely educated for his own good; rather his
education will form the “cement” which will hold society together. Education is
a two-pronged concern: both the heart i.e. the conscience and the
social-christian being, and the mind i.e. the intellectual capacity are to be
brought to fulfilment. We will see that of the two Van Crombrugghe sees that
former as having the greater importance.
“In a College, four
things, it seems to me, must direct us towards this noble goal: A good choice
of studies, wise rules, the power of competition and the stronger power of
religion.”
If, in the previous paragraph,
Van Crombrugghe sets out the goals of education as he sees them, it is here
that he itemises the four specific means by which these goals are to be
achieved. Later in his speech he deals specifically with each of the four.
“Man is doubtless
capable of tending to perfection and, as a consequence, his institutions must
necessarily be subject to modification. But a half-century of misfortune has
taught us the real value of the philosophical reforms: thus we have made it a
duty to avoid the route which has been followed these past several years, and
to re-align ourselves with the beaux siècles of knowledge in order to discover
there the lessons of the true masters of the education of youth.”
After the unwelcome
and, to Van Crombrugghe's mind, disastrous changes forced on Belgian education
by the Austrians and, more importantly, the French, it is the time to return to
an education based on the solid principles enumerated by the masters of past
centuries. Van Crombrugghe lists three here specifically: Fénélon, Rollin and
Jouvancy, and later makes it clear that Quintilian is to be numbered among
them. They are the “legislators of education” and the “friends of youth” and it
is their methods, their rules, which will set education back on the right path.
François de Salignac de
la Mothe-Fénélon (1651 - 1715) was a member of the noblesse de province. His
early education under a private tutor gave him an early love for the classics
which remained one of his characteristics throughout his life.[225] At the age of twelve he went to the University
of Cahors, and thence to the University of Paris, subsequently transferring to
the seminary of Saint-Sulpice where he found himself under the tutelage of
Louis Tronson of whom he was later to write:
“I congratulate
myself on having had M. Tronson for my instructor in the Word of Life and
having been formed under his personal care for the ecclesiastical state. Never was any man superior to him in
discipline, in skill, prudence, piety and insight into character.”[226]
Already here we see
Fénélon valuing the same traits which Van Crombrugghe was later to value.
Fénélon was ordained priest in 1674 or 1675. In 1678 he was appointed Superior
of the Nouvelles Catholiques of
Paris, a sisterhood established in order to “furnish young Protestant female
converts with safe retreats against the persecution of their parents and the
wiles of the heretics.”[227] Whilst acting as Superior, he went to live with
his uncle, the Marquis Antoine de Fénélon, among whose many friends was the Duc
de Beauvilliers, father of nine daughters. At the request of the Duchesse de
Beauvilliers, Fénélon wrote his “Traité
de l’Education des Filles” (although this was not published until 1689).
Partly as a result of this publication, in the same year Fénélon was appointed précepteur to the Duc de Bourgogne,
eldest son to the Dauphin. The précepteur
was a tutor who was responsible for the intellectual, moral and religious
education of the pupil.[228] In 1695 he became Archbishop of Cambrai.
At approximately the
same time as he was writing the Traité de
l’Education de Filles another important educational work, Du choix et de la Méthode des Etudes was
being written by l’Abbé Claude Fleury and Barnard infers that they were in
touch with each other and familiar with each other’s views.[229] Both regarded moral and intellectual education
as inseparable and the pupils should above all learn to exercise reason. Fleury
is quoted as saying “as for the mind, they must be trained from an early age to
think consecutively and to judge soundly on those everyday matters which may be
useful to them”.[230] It should be noted that the Traité is a good deal more than a
treatise on the education of girls: roughly two-thirds of it is equally
applicable to boys: in the relevant chapters Fénélon uses the word “enfants” and never “filles”.[231] Two letters written to the Abbé Fleury (by then
the Duc de Bourgogne’s sous-précepteur)
indicate that intellectual instruction is regarded as a means to a moral
education; the task being not so much to inform the Duc’s mind but to reform
his passionate and uncontrolled disposition.[232]
“But you know better
than I that you should not press him in this for fear of discouraging, by a
purely intellectual exercise, a disposition which is idle and impatient and
which is largely dominated by the imagination.”[233]
Barnard sums up his
overview of Fénélon as an educator in these words:
“Education to Fénélon
is never just a matter of acquiring knowledge and technical skills. It implies
realising and achieving high standards, whether intellectual, moral or
spiritual, and thinking seriously about the major problems and responsibilities
which the individual, whatever his particular position in society, has to
face.”[234]
In order to see more
specifically some of the parallels between Fénélon and Van Crombrugghe, or more
accurately some of those passages which Van Crombrugghe might be considered to
have “borrowed” from Fénélon, we need a take a closer look at the Traité, and, more specifically, those
sections identified by Barnard (1966) as being directed at education in
general.[235] It is not intended here to give a complete
hermaneutic comparison of both works, but rather to highlight by some chosen
examples the strong link between the two.
In Chapter Three of the
Traité (The Foundations of Education)
Fénélon states that “children are naturally but little inclined towards the
good”. Their “brain substance is soft” (Van Crombrugghe's “soft wax”) and
therefore everything is easily impressed on it. Nevertheless, one should shrink
from overly advancing a child’s intellectual development for “the danger of
vanity and pertness is greater than the fruits of these premature educations.”
“We must then be content to follow and to aid nature” - here Fénélon
foreshadows Froebel and Pestalozzi.[236] In Van Crombrugghe we read that “la nature
propose, l’éducation achève”.
In Chapter Five
(Indirect Instruction. Children should not be forced) we read the following:
“The softness of the
brain allows everything to be easily impressed on it and renders very vivid the
images of all objects which are perceived. So we must hasten to write on their
brains while the characters can easily be formed there. But we must be careful
in choosing the images which must be inscribed, for we should only store up in
a receptacle so small and so precious only the choicest things”.[237]
Van Crombrugghe has
incorporated this text verbatim into
his 1815 speech, and we see it later reflected in the Epilogue to the Règlement des Professeurs:
“Don't pour anything
but the purest fluids into these precious vessels which have been confided to
your care; only give colours worth keeping to this wool, or rather, acceptable
habits to these lambs whose shepherd you have been appointed.”
The following section from Fénélon:
“Never, unless it is
absolutely necessary, assume a severe and commanding air which makes children
afraid ..... You will shut up their hearts and lose their confidence, without
which no results can be expected in education. Make yourself loved by them. Let
them be quite often with you and never afraid to let them see your faults. To
achieve that be lenient towards those who are frank with you. Do not appear
shocked or annoyed by their evil tendencies; on the contrary be sympathetic
with their weakness. Sometimes there may result the disadvantage that they will
be less constrained by fear; but, when all is said, confidence and sincerity
are more helpful to them than stern authority.”[238]
appears semi-verbatim in Van Crombrugghe as:
“This explains above
all our continued efforts not to adopt, except in cases of extreme necessity,
that imperious and austere manner which makes the children tremble, hardens
their hearts and denies that conscience without which their is no fruit to be
expected from education. We prefer to try and make ourselves loved by them so
that they can be free with us and not be afraid to let us see their failings.
To ensure success in this matter we look particularly kindly on those children
who hide nothing from us: we never appear surprised by their bad tendencies -
on the contrary we sympathise with their weaknesses.”
Jouvancy, as we have
already seen, was the writer of the Jesuit Ratio
Docendi. Since Van Crombrugghe mentions him specifically we can presume
that he was familiar with that work.
Quintilian, in full Marcus