Thanks to the archdiocese's Office of Religious Education, I've been teaching basic and advanced certification class for catechists these last few weeks.
Without exception, the veteran teachers in these classes have been attentive, curious, hard-working and. . .surprisingly. . .just a little upset.
Upset!?
Yes, just a little upset. Maybe surprised is the better word. In every class so far, I've been told that the information we're covering is largely new to them, or the theology we're using to explain the teachings of the Church is one they've never heard before.
What are you teaching these teachers, Father?!
The Catholic faith. Plain and simple: nothing more than the apostolic faith contained in the Creeds, the liturgies, and the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Granted, my spin on these is decidedly Dominican-Thomistic, but we are using the most basic texts available to explore what the Church teaches about prayer, the sacraments, and worship.
And. . .the teachers have found much of what the Church teaches to be. . .surprising. In every class so far we've had a student-initiated discussion that starts with, "Father, I've been teaching CCD for ____ years and no one ever told me _____!"
Any student of mine from the past knows that the focus of my classes is always the text in front of us. What does the text actually say? Why does the text say this? Why does it say what it says in this specific way?
Deliberately set aside are questions of personal experience and feelings. For example, in discussing the Real Presence, we look at the relevant paragraphs from the Catechism, etc. and spend our time "unpacking" the language used to teach the truth of Christ's sacramental presence in the Eucharist.
How we have experienced the Real Presence, or how we feel about the Church's teaching on the Real Presence is entirely irrelevant to the truth of the teaching. In the initial stages of learning about God's Self-revelation in the Eucharist, our personal take on the revelation matters not one iota.
Why does this old-fashioned method of closely reading texts cause surprise/wonder among veteran catechists? They have been taught to teach in a way that privileges experiences and feelings above intellectual content. Are experiences/feelings important to learning the faith? Absolutely. But we have experiences of the faith, feelings about the faith. In other words, the object of our experiences and feelings is the faith, and, in the absence of intellectual content, we are abandoned to do nothing more than tell stories and emote.
When you combine a 40 year legacy of institutional intellectual dissent with an experiential/emotive pedagogy, you get The Current State of Abysmal Ignorance about the Faith. You get a roomful of veteran catechists who are surprised/upset to learn that they never understood the Church's teaching on the basic truths of the faith b/c they were never taught the faith.
You also get the occasional catechist who rejects the most basic teachings of the Church and even opposes the notion that the Church has the right and responsibility to teach the faith.
Case in point: the Diocese of Arlington recently asked its 5,000 volunteer catechists to sign a declaration of fidelity to the Creed and the magisterium. Four volunteers refused to sign and resigned. These women get points for having the integrity to resign. What's interesting is how the reporter describes one woman who refused to sign the absurdly obvious declaration:
Kathleen Riley knows her beliefs on the male-only priesthood and
contraception put her at odds with leaders of her church. But as a
fifth-generation Catholic who went to a Catholic school and grew up to
teach in one, Riley feels the faith deeply woven through her.
Riley's beliefs do not "put her at odds with leaders of her church." Her beliefs put her at odds with the apostolic faith. But b/c she feels the faith deeply, her rejection of the Church's ancient teaching on the all-male priesthood and the evil of artificial contraception should not disqualify her from teaching Catholic children their tradition of faith, a faith that cannot be sliced up into discrete parts and digested individually. There's no disputing that Riley feels the faith deeply. But what exactly is she having feelings about? What is the object of her emotions? It can't be the faith b/c she doesn't accept the truth of the faith.
The rest of the article trots out all the wearying cliches professional dissidents use to justify their continuing opposition to the Church: "conscience," "abuse of authority," "polls show most Catholics ignore church teachings," "the bishops vs. the Holy Spirit," ad. nau. But at the root of the catechetical problem is the widespread rejection of the idea that the faith has intellectual content that can be handed on and the elevation of personal experience and feelings about the faith to the Chair of St. Peter.
___________________
Follow HancAquam and visit the Kindle Wish List and the Books & Things Wish List
Follow HancAquam and visit the Kindle Wish List and the Books & Things Wish List
Click on St. Martin and donate to the Dominicans! ----->