Before I go on to a discussion of the latest, broadest, and most interesting phase of Sanderson's mental life, I would like to give my readers as vivid a picture as I can of his personality and his methods of delivery. I have tried to convey an impression of his stout¹ and ruddy presence, his glancing spectacles, his short, compact but allusive² delivery, his general personal jolliness. I will give now a sketch³ of one of his Scripture⁴ lessons made by two of the boys in the school. Nothing I think could convey so well his rich discursiveness⁵ nor the affectionate humour he inspired throughout the school. Here it is.  
'SCRIPTURE LESSON
 
'Delivered by F. W. Sanderson on Sunday, 25th May 1919, and taken down word for word[Pg 73] by X and Y, and subsequently written up by them.
 
'Limitations of space and time have prevented them from including all the lesson. Omissions⁶ have been indicated. They apologise for the lapses⁷ of the speaker into inaudibility, which were not their fault. They do not hold themselves in any way responsible for the opinions expressed herein.
 
'ANALYSIS
 
'of the portions copied.
 
'Characteristic portions in the Gospel of St. Matthew.
 
'Obstinacy⁸ of the Oxford⁹ and Cambridge Schools Examination Board.
 
'Character of the devil, according to some modern writers.
 
'First act of our Lord on beginning the Galilean Ministry¹⁰.
 
'Empire Day.
 
'Subject of the Scripture lesson:—St. Matthew, chaps. iv and v.
 
('The Temptations, the commencement of the [Pg 74]Galilean Ministry, the first portion of the Sermon on the Mount.')
 
'(The headmaster enters, worries his gown, sits down, adjusts his waistcoat, and coughs once.)
 
'The—um—er—I am taking you through the Gospel of St. Matthew. I think, as a matter of fact, we got to the end of the third chapter. We won't spend much time over the fourth. The fourth, I think, is the—er—er—Temptations, which I have already taken with you—a rather—er—very interesting—ah—very interesting—er—survival. That the Temptation Narrative¹¹ should have survived shows that there is probably something of value in it or I do not think it would have survived. There are two incidents of very similar character of—er—very—er—similar character and—ah—different to a certain extent from everything else—er—ah— There is a boy in that corner not listening to me. Who is that boy in the corner there? No, not you—two rows in front. I will come down to you later, my boy. There are two incidents in the Gospel Narrative which are similar in—er—character and which I have for the moment called "Survivals"—very characteristic, namely, the somewhat surprising[Pg 75] narrative of the Temptation of our Lord, and the other the account of the Transfiguration. These are different in form and character from other narratives¹², just in the same way as the account of our Lord sending messages to the Baptist differs from others. Er—yes—that last one. I should put them together as coming from a similar source (lapse into inaudibility—bow wow wow. Unique in characteristic—bow wow wow—Somewhat subtle—bow wow). One remarks that the Temptations are always looked at from the personal point of view, which I have put down in my synopsis¹³. Has anybody here got my synopsis? lend it to me a moment. I don't think the personal significance of the Gospel stories has importance nowadays. We needn't consider it. That's what I think about things in general. Personal importance giving place to universal needs. We are not so much concerned with whether boys do evil or not. Of course it annoys me if I find a boy doing evil. Leading others astray. Shockingly annoying. Oughtn't to be. Like continuous mathematics not enabling a boy to pass in arithmetic—bow wow wow—screw loose. See what I mean, K——? Not referring to you, my boy[Pg 76] (laughter). Hunt me up something in Plato about all these things. During the last generation—
 
'(Half a page omitted.)
 
'Just in the same way from another point of view shall we live for own advancement¹⁴, which we are continually tempted¹⁵ to do? It's awfully¹⁶ annoying if you do certain things and people won't recognise them. I was pretty heftily annoyed myself at a meeting of the Oxford and Cambridge Board. Professor Barker—great man—I nearly always agree with him. Professor Barker. They had made science compulsory¹⁷ for the school certificate. Bow wow wow. I don't want boys turned aside from their main purpose to have to get up scraps¹⁸ and snippets of science. Literary pursuits and so on. I wouldn't have it at any price. Bow wow wow. Modern languages are compulsory too. By looking at a boy's French set I can tell whether he can pass or not. Bow wow. Professor Barker proposed that science should be voluntary. I seconded him, but I said that languages should be voluntary as well. He didn't see that at all. Isn't it enough to make a man angry?
 
[Pg 77]
 
'(Half a dozen lines omitted from our note as incomprehensible.)

Join or Log In! You need to log in to continue reading

Create a new account   I have a account already

	Create an New Account
Email:  (User Name)
Password:	Letters and numbers only. 6-20 characters.
Retype Password:
Screen Name:	Letters and numbers only. 6-50 Characters.
Confirmation Code:	(Please type in the characters in the green image.)

	Login into Your Account
Email:
Password:
	Remember me on this computer.

(Left Keyword <-) Previous: CHAPTER IV The Re-establishment of Relations Between School and Reality Back Next: 2小节 (Right Keyword:->)