Minister Aloof From Morals Controversy

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30233, 11 September 1963, Page 21

Minister Aloof From Morals Controversy

( N.Z.P.A .-Reuter —Copyright)

LONDON, Sept. 7. A storm of righteous moral indignation is raging around the head of Britain’s bachelor Minister of Education, Sir Edward Boyle, for failing to repudiate the “modem” views on chastity of his principal medical officer, Dr. Peter Henderson. A Parliamentary row is brewing and several members say they intend to force Sir Edward Boyle to say clearly whether he approves of intercourse before marriage. Dr. Henderson recently told a group of 50 young teachers and lecturers that engaged couples who had intercourse were not necessarily unchaste. The blast of criticism that resulted from his lecture was doubled when Sir Edward Boyle refused to intervene. x

He said he felt it would be wrong for him to try to impose his personal views on schools.

Sir Edward Boyle, aged 40, who describes himself half seriously as “a Puritan,” is determined not v lay down any regulation on morals, politics or religion for Britain’s 200,000 teachers. Without giving a hint of his personal opinion, he has insisted that it is not his duty as a Minister > to lay down the law on the subject of sex. Sir Edward Boyle sees the danger of taking a stand on the matter leading to direction of teachers.

His critics, on the other hand, see the danger that Dr. Henderson’s view might be regarded as officially endorsed and be taken as sound advice by many young people. The fact that Dr. Henderson prefaced his remarks with the assertion that, in general, he did not believe the definition of chastity was wide enough to condone promiscuity either before or during marriage, does npt detract from their fears.

The most distinguished of Sir Edward Boyle’s critics to put his views into print is Lord Fisher of Lambeth, former Archbishop of Canterbury. He argued that the Minister’s attitude was negative, because he had already advised teachers to dissuade their pupils from smoking. “Should not the Minister advise the teachers to teach, if they conscientiously can, that fornication is wrong and unchaste, and liable to lead to conditions just as debilitating to the spirit of man and woman as lung cancer is to the body?” he wrote in a popular Sunday newspaper.

In spite of opposition. Sir Edward Boyle is expected to defend his refusal to admonish Dr. Henderson, and to make an important policy statement when the chastity row breaks loose in the Commons.

As for the community, a recent public opinion poll conducted for a serious Sunday paper found that 63 persons in a hundred disagreed with Dr. Henderson’s views. Seventeen agreed, and 17 dad not have an opinion.