If we have not taught our faith well since 1960, what should we do to change this?

[Scott_Milso]

I think we need more rigorous CCD classes and in Catholic schools the students should be required to have a certain predetermined amount of knowledge before they can pass.
It would also help to have some education available for the CCD instructors.

 

[Ann_Stanton]

Thank you to everyone for their (name removed by moderator)ut. I decided on 1960 because it was just before Vatican II. Many individuals on CAF have said they did not get the information they needed. I have read many times that our priests need to say more in their homilies. My priest starts his talk with a simple situation or idea from the CCC and then takes it further. Also, there seems to be many programs that try to help students by requiring service hours, retreats, and required sacramental education. I have been a teacher in public schools working with new immigrants and teens who have been sent to alternative education programs. I do not have the answers to the poor religious education of the past.

 

[Dovekin]

He Catholic faith has not been taught well since 1900. We have the examples of Spain and Italy, dominanfly Caholic nations, adopting Fascist governments if we are under any illusion that Catholicism was taught well.

Children should be taught how to learn about God and the Church, not just fed information as the Baltimore catechism did. We do not have all the answers wrapped up in q&a format, and that impression should never be given. We look to Christ for the answers, not a book, so we need to teach how to know Christ.

Confirmation should be given before First Communion, so it will act as the graduation ceremony. You might have the Eucharist as the graduation rite, but that is much better. After first communion, people need to learn about prayer, church, morality, etc.

Education programs for Catholic schools are useless, at least in the US. There are not enough kids in Catholic schools to make an impact. Programs need to be directed toward those not in Catholic schools.

 

[jeannetherese]

Agreed. Many students have not been taught the basic tenets of our faith. The Bible, Baltimore Catechism, and frequent exposure to the sacraments (including time for silent adoration), especially Communion and Confession should be emphasized.
Teachers and catechists should have, as a condition of employment, a commitment to teach within the parameters of the Magisterium.

 

[philipl]

Go back to the Baltimore Catechism. Teh VatII Catechism is poorly written and contradict itself is so many places.

 

[stpurl]

I think you’re missing something. You say ‘kids’. "Kids’ in religious education range in age from 5 to 18. I HAVE a 5 year old and a 7 year old at home. They do not go to school, nor are they at home, telling me that they believe in i before e implicitly, or that they value the concepts of addition and subtraction enough to keep on learning as it’s important to them.

And, as I mentioned earlier but apparently have to dot the i’s and cross the t’s, it is the 5 year old, the 7 year old, even in many cases the 10 year old, who are the ones who need and should be receiving rote memorization and courses which are not driven by a 'what do YOU darling child NEED to value in your life", the kind of foundational teaching that will lead to the child being actually able, around the ages of 11 plus, to have some kind of tools to MAKE these judgments.

Does this mean I advocate the ridiculous image of the stern nun, ruler in hand, castigating the child who does not regurgitate the ‘Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit’ quickly and perfectly? By no means. It is a pity that in modern society we have replaced dialogue to a great extent with people, intelligent, articulate, and caring people, who simply play ‘talking points’ at each other.

People hear, “memorization is a useful tool for the young child” and in their minds, they ‘see’ the nun, they hear the anecdotes from ages past of the browbeaten child who does ‘data dumps’ and they extrapolate that into the idea that ‘all students’ prior to some magic date in the 1960s spent their entire scholastic career with no (name removed by moderator)ut, required to mouth meaningless words and concepts which they then valued as nothing, and so the entire concept of memorization is suspect. I don’t mean you, QwertyGirl, you haven’t said anything of the kind and I think you are probably more ‘on the page’ with me and I with you, but in a way, even if you wouldn’t argue the scenario above, you’ve been affected by it in the same way that we are affected by our unconscious biases. Because there has been such a huge emphasis by the NEA and most in society, teachers, parents, etc. regarding the current wisdom of child-driven and values and the need for relevance to students, most people accept it without question.

It’s the same with the EF and the OF (ducks and runs for cover); even if most people don’t consciously realize it, if one has been raised to believe that something was ‘replaced’ by something else, the ‘old’ is deemed faulty and the new ‘right’. (yes, “New Coke’ is the exception that proves the rule!”, LOL)

 

[fhansen]

The main place to train children in the faith is at home and at catechism/CCD. I think the Church has opportunity now to teach better than they did in the 60s, to the extent that catechists are properly trained, have deep faith in and love for God themselves, and adhere to the basics while also teaching from the heart.

 

[vallancec]

We should really educate ourselves and our children on what our faith is and how to live it. We should show and teach the next generation how to live as a good catholic so our children and grandchildren never have to ask this questions. If people out there want a place to start talk to your priest about RCIA or any books he would recommend to read to learn more about the faith.

 

[QwertyGirl]

I love rote memorization. I have a photographic memory, so it is quite effective for me. Over the past 50 years, much research has been conducted with regards to “how” individuals learn. The upshot of it is that there are many ways to learn, and most people have one way which is most effective for them.

I would say (and there is research that backs this concept up) that to be an effective learner, one needs to have an open mind.

I think differentiation of lessons is key, with an emphasis added to making the lesson relevant to the learner. As learners grow, they hopefully will accept the burden and owenership of finding the relevance of any new lesson for themselves.

My point has been that the Catholic Church, if it expects chatechism to have the effect it wants, needs to up its game in the methods it uses to educate the flock.

 

[stpurl]

I agree that the Church (and definitely public, and private, schools as well) need to ‘up the game’. I know what you mean; my 7 year old learns with a kinesthetic approach and the 5 year old with a visual approach. When I’m teaching the 7 year old he needs to have something to DO to reinforce what he is learning, whether he is working on repetitive tasks or on reading; when the 5 year old is learning he is almost always doodling and doing visual ‘checkbacks’.

But again, we need to differentiate also between young children and older children. Too often schools (and catechesis) either work with the same strategies for a 12 year period (the 70s and 80s, "cut, color, and make banners’ whether you’re grade 1 or grade 12, for example, OR they make too sharp a differentiation. The school in which from grades K-3 you were encouraged to sit on the floor, eat during class, journal and never have your spelling corrected, play games, etc., turns, at grade 4 up, into a place where you are now sanctioned if you do not remain in your chair as if you were glued there, where your spelling is constantly corrected and where NOW you are given the ‘rote memorization’, where everything is presented as deadly earnest and deadly dull, etc. Instead of starting from the beginning with gentle, careful correction, which the child welcomes because EVERYTHING is new and it doesn’t seem dull or boring (witness very young children who THRIVE on hearing the same stories told over and over and over), and slowly increasing the child’s capabilities to focus and stick to things (which the child has been doing and enjoying by instinct), they’ve ruined both the earlier years of learning AND the later ones.

 

[Ann_Stanton]

No one has said anything negative about priests. A significant number of individuals on this forum have stated that they did not feel that they were not taught what they needed. The other thread was about not teaching morality (divorce and remarriage is wrong etc.) to Confirmation students. I understand that you just joined CAF and you are welcome to your opinions.

 

[Reuben_J]

Thank you to everyone for their (name removed by moderator)ut. I decided on 1960 because it was just before Vatican II. Many individuals on CAF have said they did not get the information they needed. I have read many times that our priests need to say more in their homilies. My priest starts his talk with a simple situation or idea from the CCC and then takes it further. Also, there seems to be many programs that try to help students by requiring service hours, retreats, and required sacramental education. I have been a teacher in public schools working with new immigrants and teens who have been sent to alternative education programs. I do not have the answers to the poor religious education of the past.

There are many factors that can lead to poor religious knowledge and education, which can lead to poor practicing of the faith.

Let’s take this as an example.

The late sixties was an important period in our history. There were a few discoveries, though not that new, that changed our lives forever. The advent of the age of the Beatles, hippies, sex, drug, greater use of media (TV), Vietnam War and rebelliousness.

Artificial birth control became more prevalent, and now people could have sex without being accountable. This developed into a culture of independent from the shackle of traditional religious value.

The parents of the late sixties and early seventies were pre-Vatican II kids, when religious knowledge education was not too bad. They simply were swallowed by the new way of life as a result of the new discoveries.

So, if these people had become Godless, naturally so too were their children, who in turn were parents of the nineties.

We had lost many years of Godlessness. We need to claim back God to our generations and only the Holy Spirit can help us if we turn to God for help. Nothing else will.

God bless.

 

[Blessedwithfive]

I will weight in as well…I have been a Catechist for over 20 years and my attitudes have changed dramatically since I began teaching. At first, I just wanted the parents to bring me the kids and let me teach the faith to them. If they brought them to class every week, I could make disciples out of them…I was so wrong.

Now I realize that we must TEACH the parents that they are the primary educators and I just am there to HELP them teach their own kids. Without parent support, I cannot make disciples of the children. It has to come from the parents and the parents need to realize this and run with it. Too often we seem to believe that we know more than the parents and the parents then defer to our one hour class to teach all that needs to be known.

I also believe very strongly that those children with the “weakest” faith NEED the sacraments the most. Confirm them all…even if the boxes have not all been checked…
Take the kids to Confession as a class even if it means you will “miss” a classroom time. Take the kids to Mass as part of the program. Let the children witness Baptisms and Anointing of the sick…tell them that their prayers matter.

Some will argue that the parents don’t know the faith well enough but I believe that if you expect the parents to teach the faith, they will rise up to the challenge and learn the faith for their kids. Too often I think we assume the parents won’t. I think we forget that the parents REALLY do want what is best for their children. Don’t sell the parents short…