Page 6, 26th November 1943

26th November 1943
Page 6
Page 6, 26th November 1943 — RUSSIA AND ROME AGREE on the dangers of co-education
Close

Report an error

Noticed an error on this page?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it.

Tags

People: Tsuzmer

Share


Related articles

Kremlin Approves Russian Bishop

Page 1 from 28th July 1989

Reactions To The Attack On U.s.s.r.

Page 1 from 4th July 1941

Pope's Late Answer To Stalin's Question

Page 2 from 5th February 1988

Pope's Late Answer To Stalin's Question

Page 14 from 5th February 1988

Star Wars And The Vatican

Page 3 from 19th July 1985

RUSSIA AND ROME AGREE on the dangers of co-education

Keywords: Gender, Man, Education

The experiment of co-education has ended in U.S.S.R., according to Professor NI, Tsuzmer, a prominent Soviet educationist, writing In the " Soviet War News." We therefore quote below two authorities on this question of co-education — Pope Plus XI In his encyclical " Divini Illius Magistrrof 1929, and Professor Tsuzmer to-day, to Indicate hoe, Russian thought on this subject Is approximating now to Papal opinion.

The Pope said: " False also and harmful to Christian education is the 30. called method of ' co-education.' This, too, by many of its supporters, is founded upon naturalism and the denial of original sin; but by all upon a deplorable confusion of ideas that mistakes a levelling promiscuity and equality, for the legitimate association of the sexes. The Creator has ordained and disposed perfect union of the sexes only in matrimony. and with varying degrees of contact. in the family and in society.

" Besides. there is not in nature itself, which fashions the two quite different in organism, in temperament, in abilities. anything to suggest that there can he or ought to be promiscuity. and much less equality. in the training of the two sexes. These in keeping with the wonderful designs of the Creator are destined to complement each other in the family and in society precisely because of their differences. which therefore ought to be maintained and encouraged during their years of formation, with the necessary disdnction and corresponding separadon according to age and circumstances.

" These principles, with due regard to time and place, must, in accordance with Christian pru dence, be applied to all schools. particularly in the most delicate and decisive period of formation. that, namely, of adolescence. . ." The Professor says: . . that the different rate of physiological development in boys and girls produces uneven classes when they are brought up together and hinders correct teaching, making girls overstrain themselves in the critical phase of sexual ripening; that Joint teaching and upbringing can result in an undesirable levelling out of the psychological features characteristic of each sex; that the danger of infringing the basis of sexual morality at school age is increased not diminished." These are prerevolutionary obfections quoted try the Professor, who goes on to confirm them in present-day experience:

" The school must provide such education and training, taking into account the specific chaserterisilcs of children and adolescents of both sexes and to fulfilling one of our most important State tasks— the preparation for life of citizens of both sexes en'toying equal rights. in friendship building up the family and the Socialist State, and defending this State. To accomplish this, it is necessary to introduce the separate education of boys and girls in childhood and adolescence. . . While providing a completels equal level of general education for girls and boys. it is an unavoidable neces.sity to differentiate the school curricula in accordance with the nature. the aptitudes and somewhat different social Mks of the sexes."




blog comments powered by Disqus