Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

PAGE~4—THE BULLETIN, September 3, 1960 "..With Freedom and Justice for All" In a recent edition of the Atlanta Con stitution, publisher Ralph McGill sets forth what he believes to be a “part of the com plexity of the political problem” occasioned -by the nomination of a Catholic for the Presidency of the United States, namely, -/‘parochial or church supported schools.” Obviously, since the problem arises in connection with a Catholic candidate for public office, Mr. McGill really means “Catholic schools.” He goes on to say that “For many thoughtful persons” this is a problem “wholly outside the area of prejudice.” With this we are in wholehearted agree ment, particularly since the problem seems to be shared by Mr. McGill, and anyone familiar with his daily column knows that religious prejudice is not part of his make-up. But with all due respect to the Atlanta publisher, we must insist that the prob lem of Catholic schools has no more foun dation in fact than the conflict which he sees between them and the public schools. The problem stems from a misunder standing of the raison d'etre of the Catho lic schools and the “growing clamor” of their supporters. Catholic schools do not exist merely because Americans enjoy freedom of choice. They exist because Americans en joy freedom of conscience. They do not exist simply so that Catholic children may have “extra” religious instruction not re ceived in public schools. They exist so that Catholic children may have adequate •eligious instruction. Catholic schools exist because the eon- cience of the Catholic parent tells him hat an educational program which neg- scts an essential part of the human per- nnality or a basic area of human know- ■dge and experience is an incomplete .rogram. They exist because Catholic par ents are humble enough to admit that they are no more able to teach their children all they need to know about their religion than they are to teach them all they need to know about mathematics, history or lit erature. Catholic schools exist because Catholic parents know that they, not the state, must render an account of their stewardship over the souls as well aTthe" bodies of their children. In a word, Cath olic schools exist because the Catholic conscience echoes the scriptural admoni tion, “Not by bread alone does man live, but by every word that proceeds from the mouth of God.” No, Catholic schools do not exist mere ly as the result of the exercise of free choice, or capricious whim, or the mere desire to be different. Nothing short of the demands of the deepest conscientious con viction could prompt the great sacrifices necessary to maintain them. We readily agree with Mr. McGill that if parents merely desire more individual attention for their children or a more spe cialized training program, then they must be willing to pay for it. But we emphatic ally deny that Americans must “pay” for exercising their freedom of conscience. This brings us to the “growing clamor’ alluded to by Mr. McGill. Neither the Catholic Church nor Catholic parents ini tiated the cry for “Federal aid to educa tion.” But the fact is that such aid is being proposed — for public schools_only. This aid would be furnished from the taxes which all parents pay, but it would be extended only to the children of some. However, Mr. McGill seemingly thinks that the parochial schools are in conflict with or pose some sort of threat to the pub lic schools since he closes his observations with the remark that “public education . . . must not be hurt by private schools.” The “growing clamor” is the voice of Catholic parents asking “How can it be right for a government which guarantees the free exercise of religion to penalize us for exercising ours? “How can it be just for the government to take our taxes to educate someone else’s children while total ly ignoring the educational needs of our own?” It is the voice of parents who know that it is they, not the city, or the county, or the state who pay the taxes, and who rightly reason that it is they, not the city, county, or state who should receive the benefits paid for by those taxes. In short, there is no “problem” of parochial or church related schools. Their existence is only a living monument to American Freedom of Conscience, and the “growing clamor” of their supporters is only for simple justice, nothing more. Teacher-Student Ratio Challenged THE BACKDROP .VII - One of the most widely ac cepted assumptions in the. field hf? education, that teaching is P’ ^Cost affective when classes are un - ^rsoing seri es re-evalu- -ion. In the jar- .‘oh’ of the .eaching pro fession the re- 1 a t i o n be- tweeh the size of the class and the teacher is ‘known as the “teacher-student ratio.” It is usually assumed that the all-important ratio must be maintained at any cost: one teacher to 35 pupils at the ele mentary level, one teacher to 25 pupils for high schools and one teacher to 13 students for colleges. BETTER TEACHERS NEEDED In view of the proclaimed shortage of teachers and of classrooms, the teacher-student ratio is a matter of prime im portance. If the present formu la is correct, then the future educational requirements of the country can be met only by vastly increased expenditures for additional teachers and new school buildings. If, however, a teachdr can effectively instruct larger classes, the so-called “crisis” in education may be relieved, in large measure, with out a substantial increase in the teaching force or in classroom facilities. At the recent annual Gover nors’ Conference in Glacier Na- By JOHN C. O’BRIEN tional Park, the validity of the accepted teacher-student ratio was challenged by two promi nent educators. Alvin C. Eurich, vice presi dent and director of The Fund for the Advancement of Educa tion, told the governors that the “first shibboleth that requires critical examination is the fix ed teacher-student ratio.” Dr. Lloyd S. Mitchell, chair man of the Experimental Study of the Utilization of the Staff in the Secondary School, also questioned the universal validi ty of the accepted ratio and sug gested that teaching talent was being wasted on duties that could be performed as effective ly by less skilled personnel. In , his address to. the gover nors, Dr. Eurich maintained that half a century of experimental work does not support the ac cepted teacher-student ratio. In fact, he said, research places the burden of proof on the propon ents of smaller classes. Students do as well, he said, on examina tions and in many cases better, if taught in larger classes by superior teachers. Instead of more teachers and more classrooms to accommo date smaller classes, Eurich sug gested that what is needed are better qualified teachers. A su perior teacher, using such mod ern facilities as television and motion pictures, he said, can impart instruction to a large class more effectively than the average teacher working with a small group. The use of television, Eurich told the governors, has changed ideas about the teacher-student ratio. He said that in 600 school districts throughout the country courses are now being offered over television. He quoted the superintendent of schools of Dade County, Florida, to the ef fect that that county had sav ed $3,000,000 in school construc tion in three years by using television in the classroom. The chief advantage of this type of instruction, the educator pointed out, is that the talents of a single, specially gifted teacher, can be made available to a larger number of students than otherwise would be pos sible. Another way to utilize teach ing talent more effectively, Dr. Mitchell informed the gover nors, is to relieve them of such chores as supervising corridors, cafeterias and study rooms and maintaining school records. Non-professional aides, he sug gested, could perform such du ties, and instructional assistants could relieve teachers of such work as correcting themes and preparing laboratory demon strations. The answer to the school problem, both educators agreed, is not necessarily bigger school budgets, a message that will fall pleasantly upon the ears of tax payers who now find that the greater part of their county tax es are being channeled into the maintenance of the school sys tem. JOTTINGS With Christ We Can Bear All Things By BARBARA C. JENCKS "With frequent — if possible daily — Communion, I need never feel an exile, never feel cut off, never friendless and alone. Though I may travel a broad, though I may never enjoy the happiness of a home, though strang ers be my compa n i o n s all life through, I have Thee to share my sufferings and sor rows." —Dom Hubert Von (feller WE CRY “peace, peace but there is no-peace.” Modern man feverishly steeks "peace for his world and peace for himself. Life becomes- more discouraging with each' daily headline. We are surrounded by more mateJ- ‘ al bounty and less spiritual se curity than at any time in the history of man. We block our ears against the beating of the primitive Congo drum and to the persuasive power of the Madison Avenue hucksters. Both symbolize the threats fac ing modern man. We read of undreamed scientific discover ies, of new planet life, new mis sile launchings and radar bal loons. New areas of science are operimg, yet no discovery has brought peace to the heart and soul of , man. We still cry .out in the darkness of a night even though a new radar missile has been launched into the heavens. We still feel physical pain and spiritual need even though all k(nds of luxuries are within easy reach, thanks to credit cards and charge accounts. When will man realize that his answer is the same today as it was in the yesterdays of a thousand years, and will be the same in the tomorrows which reach to the end of the world? • MODERN MAN must be of heroic substance to bear the fears and threats of this day. Warfare that threatens annihili- ation seems very near. Yet a more important battle is always raging in the human soul: Who am I? Where am I going? What does life mean? These ques tions are asked far more than: What makes an atom? What launches a lunar? What’s on the moon? With a new planet life being discovered, we still have with us the age-old greeds lusts as witnessed in headlines of murder, delinquency. No new food, drink, clothing;, car, home will erase insistent fears and (Continued on Page - • JOSEPH BREIG CUT OFF This is the second of my series on education and religion. I think I understand very well the arguments and feelings of those on both sides in any discussion of and religious schools. I am a prod uct of a rather u n u s ual ex perience in al ternating be tween the two. From the first through the sixth grades, I was in. a public school in the then small town of Vandergrift, Pennsylvania. The seventh and eighth grades were spent in a boarding school not far away, St. Vincent’s, con ducted by the Benedictine Fa thers. Then followed four years in Vandergrift High School. Finally, I attended the Uni versity of Notre Dame. IN EACH CASE, the teaching and example were excellent. The faculties were devoted to their work and their students. I wish I had been as industrious as those who labored to educate me. Religion was not excluded from my public schools, as some would have it excluded now, and as I suppose it is in some cases. Classes were opened with prayer and a Bible reading, and the atmosphere was one of unanimous agreement about God’s existence, the moral code, and the importance of religion. To say that my public schools were unreligious would be false. OUR There were some awkward problems, though. The few Jewish and Catholic students were ill at ease because the little religious exercises were obviously Protestant. The bac calaureate was largely a Protes tant service, with a sermon by a Protestant minister. I UNDERSTAND FULLY the attitude of those Jewish groups which go to court to get rulings against public-school religious activities, including Nativity scenes at Christmas, and the like. They are trying to guard the Jewish faith of their chil dren. I mention these matters to preface a point I want to make. I consider it of immense and al most self-evident importance. It is this: religious people, whether Protestant, Jewish or Catholic, should not fall into the folly of supposing that the solution to such small problems is the ex clusion of religion altogether from public schools. When we do that, we play into the hands of the irreligious and the atheistic. We make the mistake of driving religion out of education in the name of re ligion. We cut off our own noses, and the noses of our children. WE HURT our country and all mankind. Because we do not agree on everything about re ligion, we religious people en danger the whole religion and moral heritage which underlies civilization, and is the only ulti mately stable foundation, for any nation. What seems clear to me is that we ought to stop disputing, NOSES or at least take time out from disputing, in order to put our heads together for a religious, not an irreligious, solution of our problems. Catholics and Protestants suf fer if a Jewish child becomes secularistic, or pagan, or indif ferent about religion. Jews and Catholics are hurt if it happens to a Protestant youngster, and Protestant and Jews if the drifter is a Catholic. Indeed, the whole nation suf fers, and so does the human community all around the world. Communist atheism and coldly self-seeking secularism are al ways waiting to fill the gaps left by loss of religion. COMMON SENSE, than, would seem to suggest that religious people, who are in the great ma jority, should work together to make both the public schools and the Religious schools every thing that they might be. Religious schools cannot serve a nation as they should if they are over-harassed by financial stringency. Public schools will be what clear- thinking religious people wish them to be if the spiritual and moral are not given due place. This is true everywhere, Americans surely desire that each generation shall have the religious background needed to understand and cherish the great religious principal of the Declaration of Independence and the Northwest Ordinance —principles that have wrought the marvel of the United States. I will pursue this topic fur ther next issue. public schools MAIL CARRIER EXPLAINS FAITH SHARING OUR TREASURE Reverend J. A. O'Brien, University of Noire Dame Are you willing to explain your Faith when questioned about it? If not, you’re neglect ing your duty and failing to use a fruitful means of sharing your precious treasure with others. You don’t have to be a theologian to fH explain your Faith or an swer ques tions. You can secure the an swers from| books or from your pastor. It I was because | Elwood Gilson of Sacramento, California, answered questions that he was able, with Gocl’s grace, to help lead two families into the fold and thus indirect ly provide two priests for God’s Church. “I was a Sunday School teach er,” related Sidney A. Hall of Sacramento, “and a deacon in the Baptist Church. I never dreamed that I, a Bible-reading and ardent Baptist, would one day become a Catholic. Elwood Gilson, a Catholic, and I were mail carriers, and we often dis cussed religion. I would often stump him with Scriptural quo tations which I thought prov ed my religion. “But Elwood would look up the text, examine its context and come back with an answer. If he couldn’t figure it out him self he would get the ■ answer from a book or from his pastor. So too it was when I asked questions about the Catholic re ligion which I thought was at odds with the Bible. “Elwood was a faithful read er of Our Sunday Visitor, and the would often supplement his explanations of the Catholic Faith by giving me copies of the Visitor. I found that paper a mine of information, and liked the simple friendly manner in which the articles were written, This was going on for five years and I found my interest con stantly increasing. Indeed I was gradually convinced that the Catholic religion was the true one. “Elwood persuaded me to at tend a week’s mission with him at St. Francis Church, and that helped me a lot. In one of his sermons the missionary startled me by saying, ‘If you believe the Catholic Church is the true Church and remain out of it, you’re turning your back upon God and you cannot expect to be saved/ That both shocked and challenged me. It made me see I’d have to do something about this matter. “I had Elwood take me to his pastor, Father Gilbert Zlator, O.F.M., and asked him what I had to do to become a Catholic. He gave me a book by David Goldstein to read and told me to come back when I had fin- (Continued on Page 5) POLITICKING in the Rectory Rev. Robert N. Wharton An Irish priest once delivered a number of fiery sermons de nouncing the British, and was finally ordered by his bishop to lay off at once. He did steer clear of the subject for a month, and then one day a n n o u n ced that he was going to tell the story of the Last Supper. “Our Lord,” he reminded his listeners, “told His disciples that one of them would betray Him. The venerable Peter asked, ‘Is it I, Lord?’ Our Lord answered, ‘It is not.’ In turn, Thomas, John, James, and the others asked the same question and received the same reply. “Then Judas Iscariot arose from his chair, looked shiftily about the room, and asked gruf fly, ‘Bli’ me, I say, Guv’nor, is it I?” I really doubt that Judas Is cariot was English. If his name had been Iscariotingham or something like that, maybe. Anyway, the moral of the story is clear — politicking and preaching don’t mix. We stand for separation of politics and pulpit. But if politics have no place in the pulpit, patriotism is right at home there. We can’t favor one candidate over another, one party instead of others. But af ter the candidate and his party are in, we surely can take the stump in their favor. The fourth commandement, which directs that we respect and obey our parents, includes the precept that we show loy alty to civil authorities. The au thorities, after all, represent the country. And what is the coun try but a community of human souls — and bodies, too? The nation is not a thing without life, then, but a human group that nourishes and sustains us. I hope I’m not oozing too much sentiment now. I write this way because patriotism (Joes not depend upon sentiment or what we can get out of oth ers. Love and respect for our country and its leaders is based on a down-to-earth duty coining from God. The great Apostle, St. Paul, was not on the best of terms with the government of Rome since they put him in chains and eventually killed him. Yet he was bold enough to write to the Romans: “There exists no authority except from God, and those who exist have been ap pointed by God.” When we obey just authorities, in other words, we are obeying God Himself. An unjust government can’t demand our respect, of course. But just because the “wrong” party is in power, that doesn’t necessarily mean the admini stration is unlawful. Once the leaders take a stand against freedom, religion, motherhood and such things — we all can go underground and start blow ing up bridges. But until then, such behavior would be very disturbing to the peace and welfare of the citizens. Espe cially of those who have to cross bridges. Our patriotic duty means, then, obeying the laws of the land. They may not be the most enlightened statutes but they are to be followed anyway. We include those most easily brok en laws, the traffic laws. Patriotism also means paying taxes. We’re going to pay taxes if we buy anything at all, of course. Everything is taxed now except the air, and they might get around to putting a levy on that if they can figure out how many breaths each individual takes in an average minute. Nevertheless, a good citizen bears his burden of the cost of running the country. Another obligation we have is to defend our country. Others might be able to plead consci entious objections to the bearing of arms. But not good Catholics. Our Church teaches that we can rightfully repel force with force. Our obligation ceases, of course, if the war is unjust from our standpoint. But who can say it’s unjust? Heaven help us if every citizen starts to make his own decisions about that. The responsibility for the justice of the cause lies with the leaders alone. One duty falling on every one’s shoulders is that of taking an interest in the affairs of the nation. Democracy is at a low ebb when most persons think that Chiang Kai-shek is a Chi nese dish, that Poland is just the place where the sausage comes from, and that Hungary is what we are during the late show. I Especially in a democracy, we should manifest interest in the affairs of state. It may some times seem that our interest makes little difference with so many voices to be heard. But unless we live in the District of Columbia, we all have the priv ilege of voting. We can write to our congressman. We can choose our leaders for reasons other than their pleasant smile or su gary words. A country such as ours abounds in rights, and we lose no time in demanding them when we want. But if the rights are many, the duties must be equally numerous. Otherwise, we will lose those rights. This teaching of the Church, that patriotism is a duty, is one which should make us proud to be Catholics and Americans. We preach respect for authority and love for country, and these are the virtues that will keep the nation strong. So if this be politicking, then you can call me the political priest. But St. Paul, at least, agrees with me. Question Box (By David Q. Lipiak) Q. A newspaper article on the possibility of planetary human life distinct from our own (the article was based on a feature in "America" magazine) seems almost incredible to me. Is such a possibility only imaginative theorizing, or is it actually probably? And is it true that our Christian Faith places no obstacles to such theorizing? A. That rational life distinct from our own may exist on other planets is sheer specula tion. But the hypothesis is by no means absurd. On the con trary, it is eminently reason able, in view of the awesome infinity, wisdom, omnipotence and supreme goodness of God, the Eternal Creator and Sus- tainer of the universe. THE LOGIC of this hypothe sis become vaguely apparent when one considers, for in stance, that there are over one billion galaxies in the known universe (among which our own Milky Way is insignificant), em- (Continued on Page 5) Sullrfitt 416 8TH ST., AUGUSTA. GA. Published fortnightly by the Catholic Laymen’s Association of Georgia, Inc., with the Approbation of the Most Reverend Bishop of Savannah; and the Most Reverend Bishop of Atlanta. Subscription price $3.00 per year. Second class mail privileges authorized at Monroe, Georgia. Send notice of change of address to P. O. Box 320, Monroe, Georgia. REV. FRANCIS J. DONOHUE REV. R. DONALD KIERNAN Editor Savannah Edition Editor Atlanta Edition JOHN MARKWALTER Managing Editor Vol. 41 Saturday, September 3, 1960 No. 7 ASSOCIATION OFFICERS GEORGE GINGELL, Columbus President MRS. DAN HARRIS, Macon Vice-President TOM GRIFFIN, Atlanta Vice-President NICK CAMERIO, Macon Secretary JOHN T. BUCKLEY, Augusta Treasurer ALVIN M. McAULIFFE, Augusta Auditor JOHN MARKWALTER, Augusta . , Executive Secretary MISS CECILE FERRY, Augusta Financial Secretary