THE CHURCHES AND EDUCATION
SIR,—Paragraph 45 of the White Paper states that " the divided responsi- bilities of this system of dual control have given rise to endless com- plications in administration, which retard educational progress, engender friction, and consume time and energies which could be spent to much better purpose."
Mr. S. A. Laverty, hon. secretary of the Catholic Parents' and Electors' Association (Leeds), holds that the only bad " dual system " is where there is conflict between the two great influences in the formation of the child—the home and the school. To avoid that conflict, Mr. Laverty claims that Catholic schools, staffed by Catholic teachers, for Catholic children, should be provided by the State, free of cost to the Catholics. As there are some half-dozen other denominations which would be justified in making the same claim, Mr. Laverty must see that such a claim to purely sectarian teaching at the expense of the State is quite impracticable.
The White Paper suggests an alternative in the form of an agreed syllabus, with competent teachers to give instruction under such syllabus. That is the true solution of the denominational difficulty ; and if the leaders of the Churches cannot now agree upon such a syllabus the children will suffer from the differences disputes which will follow. If any of the denominations desire to add to such instruction purely sectarian teaching, that surely is the duty of the Churches and the parents, and not the function of the day-schools.
Moreover, on the basis of an agreed syllabus, the dual system of con- trol could be dispensed with ; and the Churches would be saved the heavy expenditure on repairs and annual cost. Single control of the schools is the fundamental necessity for achieving educational progress.—
Previous page
