Education as a mystery of cooperation
The School of Athens, Raphael
A debate that has always been at the forefront of Christian theological circles is that of the relationship between nature and grace. While these concepts have long held tension within Christian theology, the movement toward greater emphasis on our subjective experience of reality, sometimes in contrast to our understanding of reality itself, has spurred deep questions about the interaction between these two essential aspects of Christianity. Not only is there the conversation around these subjects as such, but it is a conversation that can permeate any other area of theological discourse. Its principles and its conclusions cannot stay isolated in their little box, nor should they. It finds itself affecting the thorny theological issues of Jesus’s human knowledge, the composition of the Sacred Scriptures and the possibility of those outside of the Church on earth for salvation. This shows that this debate is not just one for the ivory tower academics, but has very real consequences for the everyday Christian in the world, including education. Not only does this conversation have implications in the theological sphere, but because it is dealing with nature as much as it is grace, it should affect how we live every other aspect of our lives. I want to put forward the idea that there is a profound parallel of this view with how one approaches the field of education, and the consequences of one’s view of nature and grace will greatly affect the product of that education.
This question of education, independent of the nature and grace debate, goes back at least to Plato and Socrates when he dialogues about the process, proposing that it is a system of recollection. He states in the Meno1 his famous theory of recollection, that the knowledge is already in the mind in potency but that it must be drawn out through dialogue with another. This contradicts the opposite end of the spectrum that the information must simply be imported into the student by the expert and repeated until memorization by the student. The whole thing parallels the classic “nature versus nurture” debate but applied to teaching. The pendulum has been swinging back and forth ever since. However, this is not an article on “methods” of education. This is more of a lens through which to view the practice of education and it can be applied at any level and any method, though I would not be surprised if one method was more easily “seen” through this lens. Some things, even education methods, may just be more naturally ordered toward grace than others.
There is a long-standing tradition in Christianity that grace perfects nature. While that specific phrase goes back to St. Thomas Aquinas,2 it is largely built upon the line from St. Paul, who alluded to the Gentiles’ natural knowledge of God as a contrast to the revelation given to the Israelites.3 This verse has been extrapolated extensively, along with St. Augustine’s use of Platonic philosophy and St. Thomas Aquinas’s use of Aristotelian philosophy, to form the Natural Law tradition within Christianity. This includes a heavy use of teleology, the study of a substance’s intrinsic purpose, and virtue ethics, that actions are good morally because they participate in the substance of a virtue. If God has created a substance with an intrinsic nature, then that nature would include the end for which that substance was made, its purpose. An action is moral, or virtuous, if it is acting in accord with its purpose, or telos. In the Natural Law, this applies to human actions, which are ordered toward a certain end that ought not be willfully thwarted. The intellect, that faculty of the mind that knows things, would also be ordered toward its own intrinsic end, which is to know truth. In the field of natural knowledge, this works just fine, but what about supernatural knowledge? Is the human intellect intrinsically ordered to “Truth” as much as it is to “truth”? If grace is required, then one must distinguish exactly at what point natural knowledge ends and grace-infused supernatural knowledge begins.
This speaks of a concept introduced by the theologian Jean Galot4 and later used in an address by Pope John Paul II5 in describing the entirety of the Incarnation, the greatest intersection of nature and grace. This inter-action between nature and grace was called the “mystery of cooperation.” The first location of this mystery of cooperation was in the womb of Mary as it formed the body of Christ. It now takes place in the Church, which St. Paul called numerous times “the body of Christ.”6 One could describe a similar mystery of cooperation in what takes place in the mind of the student. While it is the teacher who provides, curates and explains the material, and it is the mind of the student who must contextualize it within himself, it cannot be said that education happens in either one of them individually. One would also have difficulty “measuring,” when the education actually happens. The fact is that it was not present in the student, then it was, but in no small part because of the student. Even if one were to say the mind of the student “caught” the material that the teacher “threw,” simply bouncing it back in the same way would not show that the student was truly educated. It is when it can be returned, but in a way that is unique to the student’s mind, that education occurred. From one perspective, the “education” is principally taking place in the student. That is where the content is being learned. But, it is clear that education would not have happened without the teacher. There is a subtle breathing in and out between the two and it is in this alchemy that learning happens.
Interestingly, neither Galot nor JPII use the phrase “mystery of cooperation” to refer to just the first moment of the life of Jesus at his conception, but to the entirety of the Incarnation. The mystery was an ongoing process. JPII actually goes a step further to adapt it to include every moment of grace that occurs after this ultimate moment in Nazareth. When human nature first cooperated with grace, it was Incarnational. Now, ever since, when our human nature cooperates with grace it will also be incarnational. Education follows this model. Aristotle and Aquinas both saw teachability, or docility, as an extension of the virtue of prudence.7 Recognizing it as a virtue means that it requires the participation of the student. Fittingly, prudence itself is defined as practical wisdom. One can conclude that the nature of docility is ordered toward wisdom, and so the intrinsic nature of the student who is teachable must also be ordered toward wisdom. Wisdom itself, according to the biblical tradition, is a grace that “comes from the Lord” (Proverbs 2:6). Of this, there is no debate.
1 Plato. Meno. 81a-86b
2 Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologiae. Part I. Q 1. A 8. r.obj. 2
3 Romans 1:20
4 Galot, Jean. Mariology and Ecumenism. Ecce Mater Tua. vol 6. 2022. Trans. by Mark Miravalle, STD.
5 December 9, 1998 General Audience.
6 cf. Romans 12:4-6; Ephesians 1:22-23; 1 Corinthians 12:27
7 Aquinas, Thomas. Summa Theologiae. Part II-II. Q 49. A 3.
