STATE AND EDUCATION

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26780, 25 May 1948, Page 6

STATE AND EDUCATION

Sir,— Mentor in Saturday’s review oi education has given a fundamental, irrefutable argument against State aid for private schools, Church or otherwise. In justice, no distinction must be made between groups of such schools; if aid is granted on the ground that such schools are relieving the State of expenditure, then all such schools must be equally aided.

However, if church schools alone are to be considered, and the Roman Catholic Church is ceaselessly demanding State aid for her schools, it follows as a matter of simple equity or justice that the Reformed churches, individually or in groups, should be entitled to set up primary and secondary schools, in addition to the few already existing, all to be supported by the State, as well as those of the R.C. Church. It is well known that the ultimate aim of the R.C. Church is to establish here the Scottish system, which was foisted at the end of 1918 upon a war-weary unsuspicious Scotland, by which R. C. schools are in the fullest sense State schools, all expenses, even to salaries of brothers and sisters (teaching orders), being completely furnished by the State. The matter of “ religious education ’’ is quite irrelevant. Otherwise, if the State is to support schools where dogmatic religious education is given, then it must support all such schools, yes, even Moslem or Rationalist.—l am, etc.. Presbyterian Elder.

Sir,—Your contributor Mentor in his fortnightly review of education is. always interesting and at times provocative. However, .in his latest review he makes statements which, unless they are further elucidated, are likely to create a wrong impression.

1. When Mentor refers to our State secular system of education does he imply that the basic philosophy of our New Zealand education is secular humanism? Dr Beeby some years ago pointed out that while our State schools did not include religious knowledge in.their curricula, they nevertheless practised Christion ethics in their community life. When Mentor takes it for granted that education must have a spiritual foundation does he also take for granted that that foundation is to be found in the religion which has moulded our culture and national character?

2. Does Mentor believe that our system of education moulded in the ’7o’s of last century, when secular humanism, with its resulting belief in evolutionary progress was becoming powerful in intellectual circles, is adequate for an age like ours with its spiritual uncertainty, its lack of standards and its apocalyptic atmosphere? In such an age ane educators doing their jobs if they do not at least point their charges to stable convictions and to a moral purpose in life? 3. Is Mentor not asking too much from the churches when he suggests that unity of belief is necessary before they can make their full contribution to national education? In education the practical issue is not unity of belief, but an agreed syllabus of religious instruction. As a matter of fact, the National Council of Churches has already approved such an agreed syllabus for use in schools under the Nelson System. Further, lam sure Mentor appreciates the great service rendered to the children of New Zealand by Sunday schools. Bible classes, and other church youth organisations, especially when this service is rendered by a large army of voluntary lay workers.. I am strongly in favour of a national system of education which gives the best possible secular education, and which guarantees the freedom of the teacher. But such a system should provide reasonable facilities for the churches on the basis of agreed syllabuses to assist in building into our education those spiritual truths which alone can garrison our democracy against the prevailing materialism on the one hand and the militant ’isms on the other that are abroad in the world to-day. Disinterested neutrality in regard to the great ultimates of lite won’t stand the strains of the twentieth century. A creative education must be rooted in a philosophy of life, and if.' we can’t find this philosophy in the great historic faith which has moulded our culture and national character where can it be found?—I am, etc., J. D. Salmona.