A Position Paper by Archbishop Paul J. Hallinan, on the Educational Aims of the Archdiocese of Atlanta.

Three years ago, in our First Census (March 1963), the computers came up with several startling conclusions:

Enrolled in Catholic elementary schools in Metropolitan Atlanta were 7,485 (72.6% of the Catholic children, age 7-13) and in Catholic High schools 1,389 (34.6% of the high school level.) High even by comparison with large, well established dioceses in the North, these figures were achieved in the new Diocese of Atlanta only seven years old.

Approximately 2,000 more Catholic pupils were in our public elementary schools, and 2,600 more in public high schools.

In the region outside Greater Atlanta, more than 1,000 Catholic children were in public elementary schools, and entire group was in public high schools.

Surprising? Yes. Discouraging? No. Reason for pride? Yes. For complacency? Certainly not. All of us, -- teachers, administrators, pastors and parents -- have been to school ourselves since the census was taken. We learned:

A) Overcrowded classrooms meant poor schools. Now a minimum of 40 pupils per classroom is being set.

B) Teachers’ salaries were entirely inadequate. Now all high school salaries have been raised, as well as sisters’ “salaries” in the elementary schools. Some of them have raised lay teachers’ pay -- it is hoped to raise them all in the very near future.

C) The counsel and participation in our schools was almost negligible. Now the Archdiocesan School Board has proved to be a great asset. During 1965, such boards have been formed in a number of parishes.

D) Along the same line but more intensively, the Lay Congress will address to the Synod recommendations for a great share of lay and religious responsibility.

E) In 1963, financing and budgeting problems were just emerging from chaos. Now many procedures have been tightened up, and the Lay Congress will address to the Synod more recommendations for more efficient management.

Much progress was made during the brief but dynamic tenure of Msgr. Patrick J. O’Connor as secretary for education. Working closely with his staff, the high school principals, school board and pastors, Monsignor was responsible for many of the steps indicated above in (A) to (E). Among the special achievement of 1963-65 were the beginnings of adult education and the Latin School and the enhancement of Our Lady’s Day School for exceptional children with a new home and increased teaching staff.

The Archdiocese of Atlanta is facing, although not as severely, a situation which is national in scope. In the rather novel attention being given now to Catholic problems, the New York Herald Tribune (1961) and the US and World Report (1964) headlined stories called “Crisis in Catholic Schools”; and Look (1963) called their treatment “Trouble Ahead for the Catholic Schools.” Stories such as these have been, in general, factually but often one-sidedly accurate. When one recalls the century old struggle of the Church to maintain her parochial school system, the perspective for the problem is clearer. Lawrence Cardinal Shehan of Baltimore, in a pamphlet appropriately called, “No Reason for Panic or Pessimism” gives an objective account. He examines with the help of a recent survey the question of the quality of the schools, the supply of teachers and the rising costs, and our relationship with the public schools as “friends and partners.” As to Catholic critics (and they are many and vocal) he concludes:

“Criticism, on the part of some Catholics, aimed at the elimination of the parochial school, may cause us additional problems. It will serve as a good purpose, however, if it spurs us to remove as soon as possible every cause of justifiable complaint.”

But the problems remain. Enrollment figures themselves reflect the future. Since 1945, public school enrollment went up 69%, while parochial enrollment jumped 12% (Carnegie Corporation Quarterly, April 1965). Yet less than a quarter of our Catholic youth are in Catholic schools. Every statistic reflects an increasing birth-rate, crowded classrooms, and a larger share of the contributed Catholic dollar.

Coupled to the boom is the shortage of the traditional teacher -- the Catholic Sister. The finer intellectual and spiritual training possible since the Sister Formation Program began, took the nuns from their assignments for a period of intensive preparation, this has been unquestionably the best thing that ever happened to Catholic education. Small classroom quotas are another asset. The reality and potential of religious vocations is impossible to estimate but there are surely proportionately fewer sisters to call upon today.

Between the accelerated school enrollment, and the sister shortage, the lay-teacher has come into his and her own. In fifteen years, the lay teacher average has risen from 10% to 30%. The mixture has enriched and diversified our schools but a just salary scale for lay teachers is another factor in rising costs. It will go still higher with the U.S. government’s entrance into education. More money is now released for teacher pay. It is well worth while.

Costs of constructing and maintaining Catholics school continue to rise. With the heavy enrollment, teacher shortage and rising costs of building, the old-time “free school” is passing.

The problems merit and are getting the full treatment from Catholic leaders. In our archdiocese, the traditional parochial school is thus appraised by the present secretary for education, Father Daniel O’Connor:

“Parochial schools in this country are not dying out. On the contrary, they increase in number each year and the number of children they educate increase each year also. In our own archdiocese, the number of children attending our schools went up again this year. Specifically, Blessed Sacrament parish opened an elementary school this year, and Sts. Peter and Paul is now working to complete a large addition to their present school.” But Father O’Connor, like every other trained administrator in Catholic education, is frank to point out what he calls the “crux of the problem.” “The statistics will show,” he states, “that a smaller percentage of Catholic students are receiving a complete Catholic education each year. It is this concern that is compelling many of our priests and lay people to look for new answers. The Catechetical Center on Parish School of Religion is one of these answers.”

There are, of course, other answers too:

1. Public support for all schools that provide a citizen education, whether they are public or private. The teaching of religion, of course, would not come under this - it would be maintained by contributed non-public funds. This was the system in effect in Savannah, Macon and Augusta for several decades before and after 1900. Its logic is summed up in the phrase: “Old math or new math -- there is no Catholic kind of math.”

Public opinion has been shifting on this delicate topic; nearly 50% interviewed in a 1963 Gallop Poll favored federal aid for Catholic schools if it was to be provided to public schools. A small breakthrough can be seen in present federal courts. As a result our srchdiocese is now receiving its first subsidy for non-religious library books to the amount of $13,835, -- small but significant. An excellent measure in my opinion would be an exemption on income tax. It would not aid the religious school nor religious body, but would assist the Catholic parent-citizens who now save other taxpayers about $2,500.00 a year by supporting both public and private schools.

2. “Shared Time” - with public schools teaching sciences, languages, math, physical education, etc. while a nearby Catholic school teaches religion, art, music and social studies. (Chicago and Sheboygan, Mich.)

3. “Released Time” - with an hour out of public school for Catholics to be bussed to a Catholic school for religion (New Orleans.)

More drastic solutions have been tried in some dioceses. In Cincinnati, early grades were dropped in order that other grades might be taught more thoroughly. St. Louis archdiocese declared a “three-year moratorium” on the opening of any new schools. Neither plan, I believe, would be feasible in our archdiocese. The first raises the extremely controversial issue, “which grades to drop?” The second would be grossly unfair in a young parish - proliferating diocese like ours. Established parishes with an older age level would have the schools. Young, growing parishes with many children would not.

Specialized programs aimed at relieving some of the pressures include: -- Pittsburgh’s “Cadet Teacher Program” (diocese pays for teacher-training; teachers agree to teach at least two years in a Catholic school); St. Louis’ “Team Teaching” in large classes, and the Dallas and New Orleans’ use of educational television. The last name is used in some of our schools to a limited extent.

Although we must agree with Cardinal Shehan that there is need for “neither panic nor pessimism”, there is no doubt that the crisis is mounting. We are all fortunate that some of the best and practical thinking is being done by a group of men who are closest to the problem, the administrators, superintendents and secretaries of the Department of Education. One of the secretaries, Msgr. John B. McDowell of Pittsburgh, states, “One cannot look into the immediate future without apprehension about the continuance of a system such as our own.”

He continues, “If the parochial school systems are forced to compete with a public school system where lay teachers’ salaries are raised to a level impossible for us to reach; if our school buildings are to be outdated by new structures erected with federal funds; if your equipment is to be compared with that purchased by the vast buying power of the national government; then there is every reason to question the advisability of continuing free parochial school systems.”

Next week we will examine his conclusion, “It is better to have all Catholics receive 50% of their education in public schools than for 50% to get no Catholic education at all.”