Item 64 - William Whewell to Julius Charles Hare

WW had a Syndicate meeting today [Syndicate for Theological Education, see WW to JCH, 1 Dec. 1841]: 'I agree with you entirely in repudiating emulation as the sole spring of action in our education. I should be very glad to reduce it within narrow limits in our system, but that I fear cannot now be done, at least not speedily. With regard to theological education, however, I do not think we need admit it to any material extent. I am afraid we cannot work any other way than by examination, at least not to the present satisfaction of the University'. The examination need only be for passing and not for honours. WW has proposed adding the Epistles in the New Testament and a limited portion of church history to the imperative subjects for degrees. WW thinks 'our laymen want a religious education as much as our clergy. Perhaps both measures may be carried'. He is 'somewhat disposed to tell the bishops that if they want to have our system more efficacious, they must acquaint themselves with the courses of theological instruction given by those professors whose subjects bear upon divinity, and regulate a portion of their examinations for ordination by these courses. This would make our lectures of more importance'. WW does not see what more can be done than insisting on formalities.Since examinations take up all the students time a permanent interest in Divinity will only occur if they are connected to the examinations until you can get the influence of exams weakened. WW thinks the books of Maurice [Frederick D. Maurice] - especially 'Kingdom of Christ' (once systematised) - may be made to produce a considerable effect in Cambridge. WW has 'something in my own power as examiner for fellowships. I have already used my influence to introduce an Anti-Lockeian philosophy, and intend to use it for other good purposes'. WW claims 'on etymological grounds as well as others mine is the genuine education. Your poetical or critical man you educate by educing his reasoning power through the discipline of mathematics. The faculty is in him and you draw it out. His poetry or his criticism he gives you spontaneously, you do not need to educe that; it is an effusion. And in like manner the spontaneous mathematician is educated by educing his imaginative and philological faculties'. Without this you would have a mere mathematician and not an educated man.