The catechetical crisis : a candid look at the problem of making Christ relevant to today's youth...and some encouraging reports on new methods




Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2016

https://archive.org/details/catecheticalcrisOOnutt



THE
CATECHETICAL

CRISIS
A candid look at
the problem of making
Christ relevant to
today’s youth . . . and
some encouraging re-
ports on new methods.

By Willis D. Nutting

® AVE MARIA PRESSNOTRE DAME, INDIANA 46556© 1966



IMPRIMATUR—>J< Most Rev. Leo A. Pursley, D.D.
Bishop of Fort Wayne-South Bend

NIHIL OBSTAT—John L. Reedy, C.S.C.
Censor Deputatus

March, 1966

Seaefeflecf



CONTENTS

I A look at the present state of
religious education: and why it is that way 4

II Dissatisfaction with teaching religion

in the classroom setting: some proposals
for revitalizing it 12

III A very important question: Is the school
the best means for religious education? 18

IV Alternatives to the school:

some concrete programs 30

V Conclusions 43



I

A look at the present state of religious
education: and why it is that way

We Catholics have been taking a renewed look at
the way we have been doing many things. We no longer,
thank God, assume that our ways are above criticism
and that the very fact that we do it this way means that
this is the right way. One of the things that we are
holding up to the light for a good look is our way of
educating the younger generation. When we look we
find that perhaps we have not been doing our best here,
and even in cases and places where we have been doing
our best that best is not good enough. So the whole
matter is up for discussion, and what we want to discuss
here is only one part of our great project of educating
people — the giving of religious education to our Catholic
young people who are attending public high schools.

Some time ago an editorial appeared in Ave Maria
magazine which disturbed us. The writer stated that we
were falling flat on our faces in our efforts to bring re-
ligion to these teen-agers. We have wonderful material,
he said, but we are not succeeding in getting much of
it across. We have a much richer sense of what our
religion means than people used to have, but no matter
how hard we teachers work to prepare our classes, no
matter how much the thing means to us and how much
effort we put out to touch the minds and wills of our
students, they are not hearing us. They sit and stare at
us blankly.

The editorial raised a great many replies from all
over the country. It said what very many teachers and

4



students and parents were already feeling. Some replies
tried to carry the matter farther by intensifying our
failure, some gave explanations, some suggested reme-
dies. This correspondence was so valuable that the editor
of Ave Maria wanted it organized so that its value could
be shared. Hence this booklet.

WHAT ARE WE
AIMING AT?

The editorial and the replies showed definitely that
we Catholics have finally come to realize the fundamental
educational principle that it is not what you teach but
what they learn that counts. We seem to have assumed
for ages that if the Faith were sufficiently expressed in
the courses we were giving, it was being sufficiently
learned by the students. We could have found out that
this was not so if we had looked at the students, but we
didn’t look.

But the results of this realization have gone deeper.
We have come not only to see that our methods of edu-
cation were not good enough. We are beginning to see
also that our educational aim was not good enough either.
The thing that we were trying to bring about in these
young people was not the best possible thing. Indeed,
it may be that our dissatisfaction with the conventional
methods of religious education is partly due to the fact
that our 20th-century Catholic renewal and our deeper
investigation of catechetics has brought about a change
in our educational goal.

Many of us in CCD classwork have probably been
feeling this change of goal rather vaguely without realiz-
ing its full significance. Father Howard B. Basler, of
Elmhurst, New York, in a very valuable letter of reply,

5



hit the nail on the head when he wrote, “The education
of those called to be committed witnesses of Christ’s
Resurrection is different from the training of obedient
servants of Holy Mother Church.” The old methods may
have worked when we had the old goal, but they certainly
don’t work now that the goal is different.

This awareness of a new goal is evident in very many
of the replies. There is insistence that we have to look
hard at these teen-agers for whom we hope to accomplish
something. These are not young people in the abstract.
They are not young people in Ireland or Poland in the
18th century. They are not American young people of
the 1920’s who lived in Catholic ghettos. They are
American teen-agers in the 1960’s, and are subject to all
the pressures and all the loyalties of these times. And
each one of them — Bill and Linda and Bettie and Bob
—is different from every other. We have to make religion
relevant to each of them.

WHAT ARE TODAY’S
YOUTH REALLY LIKE?

When these people were younger most of them were
cooperative with authority. They felt a certain respect
for their parents, and a love for them. When they started
to school they liked their teachers, except for the very
objectionable ones. They were rather anxious to learn.
They were eager to soak up information. They were
willing to memorize things. They raised their hands
eagerly when the teacher asked a question. When my
own children were still young my wife was talking with
a friend whose children had entered their teens, and she
was mentioning the fact that we weren’t experiencing
the problems that so many parents were complaining

6



about. The friend cautioned her, “Yes, but remember
that your children still like you.” We didn’t know then
what that meant, but we learned soon enough.

When young people are moving into high school they
are moving out of the beautiful simplicities of childhood.
It seems that the old loyalties almost have to be broken,
and both parents and teachers are often horrified at the
new loyalties that seem to be forming. These children
are trying to grow up, and the first step in growing up
is to cut loose from all the different kinds of apron strings
that have held a person. This means a rebellion against
all the various authorities that adult society recognizes

as “legitimate.” Parents and teachers and pastors stand
out as the nearest at hand of these legitimate authorities,
and therefore parents and teachers and pastors become
the objects of dislike, suspicion and resistance. These
young people are more alienated from the rest of society
and its ideals at this point than they will be at any later
point in their lives.

Adolescents in every place and at every time have
probably gone through a stage like this, but the situation
with our present generation is different. In former times
there was a universal public opinion against rebellion,
and the rebels were kept more or less quiet and sup-
pressed through the dangerous age. They were not
allowed to speak out. They were to be seen and not heard.
They had to show respect to their elders and wait on
them. They had to show deference to their opinions
and obey whichever older person happened to be around.
If they lived through this period of adolescence, they
would fall back into the way of thinking they had re-
belled against and would take their places, as elders, in
repressing the next generation’s tendency to rebel.

But no matter how much we older people may regret

7



the fact, things are really different now — different with
Catholic youth as well as others. These youthful rebels
find support among the older generation. People who
count are cheering them on and making allowances for
them. Youth is the center of attention and consideration.
It is their age and they like it that way. We may think
that this worship of youth is a mistake, but it is here!
Our Catholic young people are influenced by it. We can’t
hide our faces from it. We have to take these young
people as they are and go on from there.

COMPULSION WON’T
WORK ANY LONGER

What has all this to do with the teaching of religion?
Well, in older days a person could take this rebellion of
youth, feeble as it then was or even in cases where it
was not feeble, with a certain amount of unconcern.
When the boys grew up they would fall back into their
culture pattern. Even in this country it might once have
been true that Catholic boys would fall back into the
pattern of life of the Catholic ghetto where they were
brought up. People could say, “Make these boys attend
classes in religion whether they want to or not, for
what they learn unwillingly now will be useful for them
in their Catholic adult life.”

But this is not true now. The ghetto is dissolved, and
the young Catholic rebel finds a very attractive secular
culture that he can fall into when his rebellion is over.
I myself have found many students who come to Notre
Dame from Catholic schools and who have somewhere
been led to make the assumption that the surrounding
secular culture is better than their own. They have at
some time or other gone into a general opposition to the

8



religious teaching that has been given them. They know
the Catholic answers but they do not accept them. In

the case of each teen-ager that we are teaching we must
remember this: 1 may be driving him from the Faith.

Therefore if we have a real concern that our young
people should become strong and perfect Catholic Chris-
tians we have to handle them carefully in their ado-
lescence. They won’t have any Irish or German or Polish
nationalism to hold them in line, or any anti-Catholic
persecution to give them a kind of negative loyalty to
the Faith. They will take their stand for God and the
Church only if they believe and love. It will be definitely
their choice. It will be definitely a choice. They won’t get
there by simply following the crowd.

We can look at this problem another way. There was
a time perhaps when we could regard religion as some-
thing like arithmetic or good manners. Religion con-
sisted in certain items of information and certain ways
of acting. It could be taught just like arithmetic or good
manners are taught. You can make young people learn
the items of information, and you can make them act in
a certain way (at least when you are watching them).
It doesn’t make too much difference whether they like
it or not, provided they come to be taught.

But we are becoming more and more aware that
religion is not like arithmetic or good manners. It is not
a certain amount of information to be learned and certain
ways to act (although of course it does involve truth to
be accepted and a code of action to be followed). And
since in our pluralistic culture our young people Eire
going to have to make a definite personal choice in ac-
cepting or in continuing to accept the Catholic Faith,
compelling them to attend our classes may make them
so resentful that they may never give the Faith a fair

9



hearing again. In my own adolescent days I attended
Sunday School regularly, for my people were loyal Pres-
byterians, but all the while I was forming the following
mental resolution: when I get to be my own boss I’ll
never enter a Presbyterian church.

HOW, THEN, DO YOU
GET THEM TO RESPOND?

We have to teach our young people about the Faith in
such a way that they will listen, which means that we will
have to present it in a way that will mean something
personal to them. There must he not only instruction;
there must be contagion. We must present Christ in such
a way that they will catch something from Him. At the
very least they must catch enough so they will want
more. This is a tall order for us. We must mediate a
spark between Him and them. What we may actually
have been doing is to present the Faith in a way that
hinders the spark that He wants to give them. Our
proceedings may be so dull, so resentment-rousing, or
so futile that the spark is smothered.

Here perhaps is the reason why, with all the wonder-
ful teaching material that we have these days, the stu-
dents face us with the attitude of “I couldn’t care less.”
We are trying to teach people who haven’t a spark of
interest in the subject. We do not have any technique
of transmitting that spark.

APPROACH MUST BE
A MISSIONARY ONE

One of our correspondents cautioned us to remember
that these teen-agers come to our CCD classes with a

10



great love of God. As much as I would wish this were
true, I haven’t found evidence of it. If they loved God
fervently they would be eager to know more about Him.
When these people were little children they may have
had a simple and genuine love of God, instilled into them
by the atmosphere of their home or their school. Some-
where along the line, however, most of them seem to
have let it go. The childhood acceptance that came partly
at least from their environment has not been replaced
by a personal acceptance.

Since, therefore, a good deal more than half of the
freshmen that we get have had eight grades of parochial
schooling, and since these do not show any more interest
than do the Catholic youths who have never gone to a
parochial school, and since many of those who go to
public high schools after eight grades in the parish school
never come to us at all, it must be that many young
people lose their early interest in religion during the
period down in the grades, when they are undergoing
religious instruction all the time. This seems to mean
that our problem is not only one of presenting religion to
children in public high schools. It is the problem of pre-
senting religion to adolescents in general, perhaps ex-
tending back to children in the sixth or seventh grades,
and in parochial as well as public schools.

To quote Father Basler again: “Should we not regard
the apostolate to the adolescent more of a missionary
apostolate to those who have not made any life commit-
ment rather than a proclamation of the meaning of the
Christian message to those who already believe in it?”
We have to bring them to the love of God rather than
to assume that they already love God. We have, he says,
to be missionaries.

11



II

Dissatisfaction with teaching religion

in the classroom setting: some proposals
for revitalizing it

The recognition of our lack of success in teaching
religion to high school students was almost unanimous
in the letters we received. No one reported general
success, although a few people called attention to some
successful projects which seemed to owe their success
to their being far different from the standard way of
doing things.

There was a multitude of letters from the students
themselves and from people who had been questioning

12



students. Students don’t like what is going on. The
classes are boring. The students only attend because they
have to. We knew this already, but the letters give us
some insight into the why of it.

Far and away the greatest cause of the dissatisfaction
was the fact that the courses did not deal with what the
students were interested in, although there was not much
agreement as to what they would be interested in. This
indicates a discontent that is not too well thought out,
however real it is. But Miss Mary Magner, a high school
student in South Bend, Indiana, put her finger on the
real difficulty. “You should hear us talk among our
friends sometime,” she writes. “You’d be surprised at
the questions that we raise about our religion. When we
bring these questions up in class we are usually told the
answer is too deep for us or there isn’t enough time to
discuss it. So back we go to King David” (the subject
the course was dealing with at the time).

Here you have a real clash of ideals. By every ideal
of good teaching the teacher should stick to the subject
of the course that he has prepared. This subject must
be “covered” during the time allotted, and no one must
be allowed to drag a red herring across the trail. Stu-
dents are noted for their attempts to get the teacher off
the subject. “Back to King David” is where the teacher
must take the class.

But by every ideal of the teen-ager he must insist
that he is a person and must be treated as such. When
he is present he must not be given the brush-off by some-
one in authority who wants to talk about something else.
When authority says, “we know better than you do what
it is good for you to study,” the student’s dignity as a
person is deeply stabbed. If he is present and there is
to be communication, it must be by the give-and-take of

13



dialogue. If the teacher insists that he must control what
is talked about — “back to King David” — the teen-ager
is not going to listen. It is an insult to his person-ness.
The teen-agers, by their obvious dissatisfaction with
what is going on in their religion classes, are saying,
“You brought us here. We didn’t come because we were
eager to come. If you want to talk with us you must
talk about what we want to talk about.” But you can’t
run a school on such a basis. Or can you? Some teachers
think you can.

MAKING THE SCHOOL
LESS COMPULSIVE

From two CCD teachers in South Bend there came
suggestions for keeping the training of teen-age students
in a school and making the school less rigid in its com-
pulsion.

One of the teachers, Mrs. Raymond Kent, suggests,
in answer to the objection that we teachers are “cram-
ming stuff down their throats” and not discussing what
the students want discussed, that we should present
courses in many subjects and allow the students to choose
the subjects that they are interested in. Thus we would
not have freshman, sophomore, junior and senior classes,
but classes in the Bible, Church history, race relations,
etc. “We should reserve the marriage course for the
senior year but otherwise allow considerable freedom of
choice.” The courses, or some of them, should have some
relation to what these same students are studying in
high school.

Another CCD teacher, Mrs. Arthur Frost, suggests
that instead of having separate CCD high schools for
each parish, which are often so small that the students

14



have no sense of belonging to anything important, we
should have a CCD high school for the whole community.
The program would consist of short classes in required
subjects followed by meetings to discuss the various
subjects which the students attending have an interest
in. She called attention to the fact that large groups of
teen-agers seem to generate an interest and an enthusi-
asm that smaller groups can’t attain. A CCD class of 10
always seems to have an air of struggling frailty that
discourages both the teacher and the students.

THE PURPOSE IS
CHRISTIAN FORMATION

We received news of some very well-thought-out plans
for teaching religion to adolescents in thoroughly re-
vitalized schools.

St. Christopher’s Church in San Jose, California, has
a high school of religion with an enrollment of about
256 students. Its purpose is “to form Christians. This
formation takes place through the imparting of the essen-
tials of the Faith, but also and more directly in the ex-
periencing of true religious encounters.” The authorities
recognize that a series of lessons alone does not lead
students to such encounters, and therefore they have a
program of “field trips, lab work, guest speakers, Bible
vigils, discussions, seminars, debates, leader formation,

etc., all scheduled and organized.”
There are 12 teachers, each one a specialist who pre-

pares to conduct a limited number of courses of short
duration (nine weeks each). Some courses are required
of all the students over their four years of attendance,
some are purely elective, some are open only to students
recommended by the faculty, and some have a prereq-

15



uisite of other courses. The idea is to recognize that
some subjects must be studied by each student but to
organize these subjects so as to present them in a more
attractive way.

In the report of this school sent us by Father George
B. Kutches, we find that 42 courses were listed to be
given during one full year. Father Kutches says that
they are still experimenting, and that they will need
about five more years to make the program “securely
viable.” The whole parish, he says, is involved in making
the school a success.

The Catholic Sentinel of Friday, March 5, 1965, con-
tains an article describing the CCD School of Religion
of St. Mark’s Parish, Eugene, Oregon. Thomas Albright,
the author, heads his article thus: “Parish Involvement
a Major Key to Success.” In this new parish they have
tried to “tie in as many people as possible with the
School of Religion and other phases of the CCD pro-
gram.” They have a professional teacher as a full-time
supervisor, and also a part-time assistant supervisor.
These two help the teachers prepare their classes, give
demonstrations, and coordinate the work generally. They
work very carefully with the teachers, helping each
teacher before each class. The classes are small, each
one limited to 20 students; and each one has two teachers,
usually one experienced teacher and a beginner. The
teachers must prepare themselves with much background
reading. One can see that with this large number of
teachers the whole parish would have to be involved.
And a look at the whole program shows that these teach-
ers, and the people coming to be teachers, are them-
selves getting a very thorough religious formation.

The article sent us does not give us much informa-
tion regarding the actual material taught to the high

16



school students, but we do learn that the teachers try
to correlate their subjects with what their students are
studying in the public high school, so that they will be
able to integrate the whole of their knowledge. The re-
port also indicates that there is a minimum of talking
down to the students and that the discussions are guided
rather than led, and that the teachers and students show
a realization that they are seeking Christ together. There
would appear to be not much of the back-to-King-David
attitude in this school.

The tangible accomplishments of the school, the
author says, “were perhaps best exemplified by the spirit
— of mutual effort, of easy cooperation among lay
teachers, supervisors, Sisters and parish priest — which
characterized their meeting together at the end of
Wednesday’s classes, and by the fact that several teachers
entered late, detained by questioning students.” One of
the teachers recently asked his students why they came
to the classes. “Their first answer, of course, was, ‘Be-
cause our parents make us.’ But then they all said, even
if their parents didn’t, they would be here anyhow.”

We have presented here some suggestions, several of
them confirmed by successful practice, for making the
school a better means of religious education. We also
received many suggestions for presenting the Faith to
high school students in ways that had little or nothing
to do with school. Some of these assumed that there was
a school in operation, too, some were given as an alterna-
tive to a school, but all of them are in themselves totally
different from anything that we can call “school,” and
the people who present the Faith in these plans think and
act quite differently from the mode of thinking and
acting that is characteristic of teachers. We will take
up this new discussion in the next section.

17



A very important question: Is the school
the best means for religious education?

Father Howard Easier, whom we quoted before as
saying that the apostolate to the adolescent is a mis-
sionary apostolate rather than one of teaching, goes on to
say that since we are missionaries to those who are not
necessarily eager to hear what we have to say, we must
become involved in the adolescents’ world. We must
meet them on their own ground. “The teen-ager has a
rather low tolerance for religion. The new religion texts
are excellent. They give an excellent presentation of
what the Church is all about. If you are going to present
the Christian Revelation, this is the way to do it. The
question we are raising concerns how much of this a
person is able to take during adolescent years. Do we
not find ourselves providing answers to questions which
have not yet risen?”

18



There is a serious possibility which everyone in-
terested in leading young people to Christ or presenting
Christ to young people should consider very seriously.
It is this: It may be that a school — not just a poor
school but a school as such — is not a good means for
carrying out this purpose after the young people get
past the please-teacher-ask-me stage. (By school I mean
an institution in which groups of young people meet reg-
ularly, and by compulsion if necessary, to be taught by
older persons who in one way or another can qualify as
experts in what they are teaching.) It may be that even
a good school can’t do the job very well with very many
of its students. Mary Newland, author of We and Our
Children, asserts this very definitely in her letter to us.
“The teacher-versus-pupil bit has to end before there
will be any kind of religion interiorly.”

WHY THE SCHOOL MAY
NOT BE THE BEST MEANS

There are some very strong reasons behind the doubts
of the ability of the school to handle the problem of the
religious education of teen-agers, and they are all based
on the fact that the teaching of religion aims at some-
thing beyond simple knowing. Its intention, as we have
seen in many of the replies we have discussed, is to lead
the student to recognize Christ as Emmanuel, God with
us, and through Him to love God with his whole heart
and to love his neighbor as Christ has loved him (the
student). Here are the reasons. We’ve touched on some
of these ideas before but they bear repeating:

1. Each teen-ager is a person and is becoming very
conscious of that fact. He is different from every other
person in the world. Each one must meet God in a

19



unique way, and the person who is trying to bring about
the meeting must treat each teen-ager in a unique way.
He must “play it by ear.” There is no uniform rule to
follow. The school, on the other hand, has to have a
measure of uniformity in its treatment of students. Hence
the complaint that the teachers insist on keeping to the
subject they are supposed to be teaching. . . . “Back to
King David!”

2. The teen-ager is in a more or less intense state of
rebellion against “legitimate” authority, and the teacher
is such an authority. The rebellion, so that it can be as
total as possible, is directed against what the teacher
values most. The student says in effect, “I’ll copy down
these facts that you tell me of. I’ll read the assignment
you give me. I’ll give these back to you in the examina-
tion so that I’ll pass the course. But I’ll be damned if
I’ll put the value on these things that you want me to
put on them, or be loyal to what you want me to be
loyal to, or be really interested in what you are teaching
me. If I did that I would be surrendering myself to you,
body and soul, and I won’t do that at any price.” Since
it is just this value, this loyalty, and this interest that
we want to impart in our teaching of religion, it would
seem that the minute we take the position of teacher and
they think that they are in a school, our chance of im-
parting it is lost. The whole structure of the school, its
traditions, and the traditions of young people with regard
to it are fighting against us.

3. For our high school CCD students the situation
is particularly hard, and seems to them unfair. They
have to go to school five days a week anyway, and very
likely they don’t care for it; and now they have to go to
school again. They will get even with us by a determina-
tion not to like what goes on. And such a determination

20



is a thing of iron!

4. This brings us to the very important question of
the role of compulsion in the religious education of young
people. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t
make him drink, says the old adage. Young people are
somewhat different from horses. The horse refuses to
drink only when he is not thirsty; but young people,
being persons seeking autonomy, would refuse to drink
under the circumstances even when they were thirsty, be-
cause they don’t like being led by the nose, to water or
anywhere else. Our schools are full of teen-agers who
are refusing to drink, who are daring their teachers to
teach them anything, simply because they have made it
a principle — a point of honor — to get even with those
who make them go to school in the only way left open.

Our CCD schools do not have any law to make stu-
dents attend, but they have an equivalent. The ecclesi-
astical authority threatens parents with spiritual penal-
ties if they don’t see that their children attend. The
children, then — those whose parents respect the
Church’s authority — come to our school because they
have to. (I’m sure this is true in most cases.) They are
led by the nose. And so they refuse to drink the Water
of Life that is offered to them. They refuse as a matter
of principle.

5. The young person as a person doesn’t have this
high-principled reluctance to learn from another and
older person. He has it as a student when the other
person is recognized as a teacher. He has it when he is a
member of a student group. It is a part of the students’
esprit de corps. As a matter of fact, the student who
actually does want to learn is ashamed to show any in-
terest, because the esprit de corps is against it.

For all these reasons it is quite possible that the

21



Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, in its intention to
give religious instruction to high school students through
institutions organized as much like schools as possible,
is making a fundamental mistake that is causing the lack
of success which is receiving widespread affirmation.

A TIME TO USE
PRAYERFUL IMAGINATION

The whole situation demands rethinking, radical re-
thinking. We must go over the whole matter from the
roots up, and here there is need for the use of prayerful
imagination. We will see that our letters show that some
people have been using it successfully already. It would
be well if the top authorities of the CCD would officially
call for new suggestions. And let us all try to imagine
— no matter how wild they may seem — some altogether
different ways of leading the younger generation to
Christ, and let us pray as we imagine. Let us encourage
new and startling approaches to the problem. We might
even offer prizes for good suggestions. And in this wild
imagining let us discard for the time being all the old
“musts” — expertness, uniformity, smooth-runningness,
regular attendance, courses, so many class hours in the
year, and all the things intimately connected with the
idea of school.

There is no need that any two parishes ever have the
same program. There is no need that the program be
an essentially parochial endeavor. There is no need that
what we finally decide on be related to a school
in any way. Organization and uniformity are the joy
of the administrator and a blight on all dealings of
person with person. If young people are brought to the
love of Christ it makes no difference whether the orga-

22



nizational wheels are whirring smoothly or squeaking
raucously. It makes no difference whether or not what
is happening can be recorded in neat numbers in the
diocesan office.

We need newly imagined solutions for our problem,
and we need to test out these solutions in practice with
no voices of experience telling us it can’t be done. We
must not allow our educational experts to have the final
say as to whether a newly imagined scheme shall be
tried or not. Henry Ford defined an expert as a man
who knows a hundred reasons why a thing can’t be
done. These next few years must be a period of the trial
of new paths in religious education, and if in the trial a
lot of error shows up, we must not be discouraged or
stopped. The way we are doing things now looks like
one big error.

I had the privilege at one time of working for a
week with a man who had been a pupil of Albert Einstein,
the great scientist. He told us that Einstein was con-
stantly urging his students to use their imagination, and
not to let that imagination be limited in any way by
what they thought they knew about physics. In our
situation we must do somewhat the same thing or we
won’t get anywhere.

So, in our use of the imagination let us dismiss from
our minds for the time being the old “school syndrome”
and start afresh. There are some truths about young
people that may help us as we carry on our imagining.

THE PROBLEM OF AUTHORITY
VERSUS INDEPENDENCE

Since young people of high school age are, as we
have said, pretty much in rebellion against “legitimate”

23



authority, we must not try to use that authority
either to get them to come to us or to accept
what we say to them. In this situation we have
to follow Archbishop Roberts, and try to commend
authority to them rather than impose it on them.
That is, we have to lead them to see that some authority
is right and just, and why it is right and just. We have
to wait until each one sees for himself that it is right
and accepts it voluntarily. That is, in our work with
these people we will help them to accept self-discipline;
we will not deal with them by imposing an external
discipline.

These teen-agers do not lack respect for people older
than themselves, but they want to choose who it is they
are going to respect. Official position carries with it no
automatic respect from them. They respond very well to
the advice of an older friend whom they can meet on a
man-to-man basis and who has no legitimate authority
whatever over them. From him, what they accept will
be accepted voluntarily and freely. It is better if this
friend is not much entangled with their memories of
childhood bondage. Such a person can influence them
more for good or evil than can a parent, or a teacher,
or a pastor.

High school children are entering the age when they
want to assume responsibility. But they want to choose
what they are going to be responsible for. The same
boy who will shirk all household duties, and appears to
have absolutely no sense of the obligation of helping
with the work of his family, will knock himself out com-
pletely in looking out for the welfare of his club, or even of
his neighbors down the street. This is heartbreaking for
the parents, but they should remember that an imposed
responsibility is regarded by the young person as an at-

24



tack on his personality.
These people want to make up their own minds in

both intellectual and moral matters. It is true that they
have not yet reached the wisdom which will lead them
to make good decisions, but they don’t realize this.
Moreover, in their state of mind it is disastrous to remind
them of their unwisdom. It is better to let them make
mistakes, with only a gentle warning if we see that they
are going very far wrong. If we tell them how wrong
they are before the facts prove it, we run the risk
of alienating them from us altogether, and perhaps
also from the Church which we represent in their
eyes. My most blinding rage against my own father
came when I would take up a position pretty “far
out,” and he would remark, “When you’re older
you’ll have more sense.” He was right. Now that I am
older I do have slightly more sense. But he was horribly
wrong in his tactics, for that remark, often repeated,
brought about an alienation that was never repaired till
his death.

Young people have a very keen moral sense, and a re-
markable faculty for detecting hypocrisy (and showing
it up). They have a flaming sense of injustice — of in-
justice inflicted on them, of course, but also of injustice
inflicted on someone else. We have to be very careful,
in our dealing with them, that we don’t find ourselves
on a lower moral plane than they are. Our counseling
of caution, moderation and prudence may be really an
unwillingness to make a total moral commitment, and
when this is true we deserve their contempt — and we
get it. Once we get the reputation of acting contrary
to what we preach or trying to prevent a person from
going all-out for something that is good, they will rightly
refuse to listen to us. If Christ my Lord calls me, the

25



correct response is to give an all-out answer to that call.
Those people understand this fact, even when they them-
selves have heard no call.

DON’T OVERLOAD
THE LEARNING CIRCUIT

Human beings appreciate different aspects of truth at
different stages in their development. Therefore we must
select the Christian truths to be presented to people of

any particular age. Teen-agers can understand certain
truths, and they are allergic to others. They can under-
stand a commitment to Christ and a 100-per-cent loyalty
to Him. They can understand love of neighbor and a sacri-
fice of self for him. They can understand hungering and
thirsting for justice (what they recognize as justice).
These are good and wonderful things and must be present-
ed to our young people in as effective a way as we can de-
vise. But they do not understand humility or obedience or
submission. They do not understand the striving for
perfection in the spiritual life or the renunciation of
self, or intense devotional piety. And, as I have learned
to my cost, they are not the least interested in the his-
torical justification of a belief or practice. As to what
the early Church did, they couldn’t care less. They seem
to have completely lost their earlier interest in informa-
tion for information’s sake. They always ask, “What
is the use of learning this?”

This means that there should be an order in present-
ing truth — not the logical order of the truths them-
selves, but the psychological order of the student’s ability
to appreciate them. I say appreciate rather than un-
derstand, because in religious education it is appreciation
that we want. These people will have their whole life

26



to learn in, and if and when they want to learn, there
are facilities open for them. The most successful work of
the CCD is its study clubs and its adult classes. The
people who attend come because they want to learn, and
they do learn.

Therefore we do not need to try to teach the teen-
agers right now everything that they should know
throughout their lifetime. We should concentrate on
trying to give them what they can take in and value now.
If we insist on teaching them now what they are unfitted
to grasp yet, we may condition them to an unwillingness
ever to take up the subject again. In my own high school
days my courses in literature filled me with such a dislike
for the authors studied that I vowed never to read any
of them again; and I was 50 years old before I broke
that vow.

THE LITURGY —
A PRELUDE TO FAITH

There is a very old axiom in the Church’s treasury of
ideas: Lex orandi, lex credendi. The rule of prayer de-
termines the rule of belief. A person’s actual belief, as
distinct from what he says he believes, is fundamentally
formed by the way he actually prays. Therefore the best
way to lead a person to accept the faith that the Church
believes, is to lead him really to pray the way the Church
prays. The actual participation in the Liturgy is the
way in which a person comes to know and understand
and accept the Church’s doctrine and life. This is the way
of teaching that existed when the Church was really
“going places,” and no later schemes of Christian educa-
tion have been so effective.

27



WHAT DOES IT ALL
ADD UP TO?

If what we have been saying about teen-agers is true,
we have some guides in the use of our imagination when
we are thinking of new ways to educate them.

We will want a scheme of education in which each
of these young people can be dealt with in a man-to-man
relation of friendship. There will be no compulsion
about it, and no attempt to threaten or push. The young
people will be led (or guided) by men or women who
are genuinely respected by them but who have no
“legitimate” authority over them; and these leaders will
never use any variant of the expression, “We know best.”
These leaders do not have to be experts in teaching. They
have to be what we wish the students to become: people
sincerely committed to Christ, leading Christian lives,
and possessing a working knowledge of the Faith. They
will also have to have a real concern for the young
people and a willingness and ability to approach them
as friends not as superiors.

WE’RE ALL IN
THIS TOGETHER

It is generally agreed in the Church, at least in
theory, that the whole parish, and even the whole body
of accessible Christians, is responsible for the education

of the younger generation. That is why people who have
no children in the parish school are asked to support it
with their money. It is also argued, quite convincingly,
that the parents have the 'primary obligation of educating
their own children, and that they simply delegate to the
teachers the job of taking over that part of education

28



which they (the parents) are not able to handle.
Now is the time to cash in on these theories.
We know the teen-ager has reached an age when it

is usually impossible for his parents to take care of his

education, religious education included. But if what we
have been saying is true at all, then this further truth
becomes apparent: the teachers can’t handle the teen-
agers either, in the matter of religious education. When-
ever this is the case the parents must withdraw their
authority that they had delegated to the teacher and
bestow it somewhere else.

Where? On any adult Christian who is capable of
making use of it!

This brings the whole parish and the larger Christian
community into the game. The theoretical obligation of
every adult person in the parish to do what he can in
the education of every young person in the parish now
becomes actualized. The finger points at everyone with
a “This means you!” message. The parents can’t do
this job. The teachers can’t do it. It must be done. If
you have any knowledge or any ability or any knack
which can be effective in helping with the task, you’re
elected.

Once people know that this is their job and not the
job of the professional teachers, we will be surprised at
the number of them who will accept the responsibility.
Therefore, in the use of our prayerful imagination in
devising schemes for the Catholic education of youth,
let’s not be hesitant in making use of any person or any
group that has any ability or resource that is needed.
Most of these people can’t teach school, but we don’t
want them to teach school. We want them to form some
kind of contact with some young people (perhaps with
only one), and help them to the knowledge of God.

29



IV

Alternatives to the school:

some concrete programs

Keeping in mind the idea of involving the whole
parish in the education of the young, we will now look
at some of the suggestions sent to us which call for
using adults who are not teachers at all but who can help
initiate teen-agers into a deeper appreciation of the Faith.
The first two plans aim to deal with some of the young
people, not all; and there is no need for a parish to have
just one scheme for educating all of them. Considering
the great difference between persons, no one plan of
education, not even the most inclusive, can reach all of
them. In our public school system we have many drop-
outs. This means that even such an inclusive system
doesn’t work for everybody. If we have a plan that
brings one young person to Christ who wasn’t brought
to Him before, that plan has scored a wonderful success.

30



INITIATION THROUGH
APOSTOLIC WORK

Dr. William P. Brown, of the Lay Apostolate Guild
of New York, writes that young people can best be given
their initial confrontation with Christ if they take the
plunge and begin to engage in actual apostolic work. He
advocates (and I gather that the Guild puts this into

practice) that high school students be assigned to ac-
company adult guild members when they make their
house visits to explain to families certain elements of the
Faith. The young people, who are junior members of
“apostolic teams,” attend training courses along with the
adults, but apparently they get the full realization of
what the Faith means when they listen to, and even take
part in, the discussion between the adult member of the
team and the family which is being visited. Dr. Brown’s
experience would bear out the old saying that you never
really know a thing until you have taught it.

Alice Meynell, 19th-century Catholic poet, said that
she had never in her life received any formal Catholic
instruction; she had gained her truly deep knowledge of
the Faith by listening to her parents as they discussed
religious matters with their visitors. This is what Henry
Adams would call accidental education

;

and he says that
it is the most effective kind of education. It is the kind
that Dr. Brown’s junior guild members get, and some
teen-agers can get it that way when they will refuse to
consider any education that is offered to them formally.
We can hardly suppose that the majority of teen-agers
would consent to become members of apostolic teams, but
the plan should work for some of them.

Prof. Arthur Quigley of Notre Dame has a somewhat
similar plan of accidental education which can be used

31



for some of the high school boys. Instead of apostolic
teams he would have “commentator teams.” Each of the
Mass commentators of the parish would have a junior
partner. When the adult commentator is preparing his
part in the Mass, his junior would prepare with him. They
would offer suggestions to each other and would criti-
cize each other’s performance. The junior member would
gradually be given more and more actual participation
as his experience grows. This plan makes use of the
value of liturgical participation. It gives the young per-
son a place of public importance. And it provides him
the help of an adult friend who deals with him in a man-
to-man fashion.

USING THE SUCCESSFUL
CURSILLO TECHNIQUE

As might be expected from its astonishing success
over many parts of the country, the cursillo technique
occurs to many people as the most effective alternative
to the school, for presenting religion to adolescent people.

It has apparently succeeded very well in bringing about
a serious commitment to Christ and at the same time in
imparting considerable knowledge about Him and His
relation to us. Several reports have been sent us of the
successful application of the cursillo idea to high school
students.

Father Odo Gogel, O.S.B., writes from Blue Cloud
Abbey, Marvin, South Dakota, that he and a few others
there have developed an institution which they call
Christ-teen. They call it this rather than a cursillo so
that older people will not think the cursillo is “teen-age

stuff.”

“Religion is not merely a body of truths to be

32



learned,” Father Odo says, “it is a life to be lived. Nay
more, a level of life. This cannot be contained fully in

any formula. It is a personal experience realized in a
community. The personal relationship of the Community
of Persons (the Triune God) shadows in the human per-
sonal relationships. This calls for personal encounters —
meeting one another, meeting God. The abstract ‘God is
everywhere’ must be concretized. The teen-ager can be
brought to a vivid realization that God can be met in a
very personal way.” He goes on to say that adolescence,
far from being a “silly age,” is a splendid age, the age
when God “puts in the young person’s body and heart
a deep call toward someone else, to a heart other than
his or her own. Youth wants to love and be loved. Youth
finds someone other than himself or herself. Youth goes
out of self to go toward others.” (Father here gives us
a timely warning not to sell youth short. Our young
people are eminently worthy of respect. It is only when
we respect them, and value them for what they are, that
they will listen to us.)

Father Odo made a cursillo and as a result got the
idea of forming a similar institution for teen-agers. The
venture was made with considerable trepidation, but
the result was “fantabulous,” according to the testimony
of both teen-agers and their parents. Unfortunately,
Father Odo’s letter does not contain the actual schedule
of the Christ-teen, and how it differs in detail from the
regular cursillo. We gather that it lasts two days, that
there are talks given by adult cursillistas, and that there
are lectures that “take a while to soak in.” You will have
to get more information about this apparently valuable
institution from the director himself.

Father Raymond L. Tetrault, of Our Lady of Provi-
dence Seminary, Warwick Neck, Rhode Island, writes

33



in support of the idea that the cursillo is a “natural” for
teen-agers. Christianity must be experienced, he says,
before it is learned abstractly and intellectually. “The
cursillo in three days gives a spirit that we don’t ex-
perience in many years.” Doctrine should be imparted
only after people have become eager for it.

THE SAN JOSE
CURSILLO PLAN

The most complete description of an operating cur-
sillo-like plan for teen-agers comes from Father George
Seeber, S.J., who has been running one in San Jose,
California. His report was published in the Ave Maria
of March 6, 1965.

“We adults seem to think,” says Father Seeber,
“that all we need to do to ‘form’ a teen-ager is to com-
municate to him certain truths, a body of knowledge,
and sooner or later he will commit himself to the Lord.”
But this does not seem to work. We don’t get what we
want. “We want our students to live, to experience the
thrill and challenge that exists in the Christian religion.
We want them to be apostolic, generous, and totally
dedicated.” If we want this, ordinary teaching is not
enough. We must put them where they can live out the
learning process. We must create for them “an atmo-
sphere where they can experience God and community.”

With these requirements in mind, Father Seeber and
his co-workers tried to devise a setting in which public
high school students could have this experience of Christi-
anity as “operative and relevant to their everyday liv-
ing.” They tried to create “a ‘day’ which is truly joyous
in the Lord.”

The first Sunday in each month the public high

34



school students meet to take part in such a day. The
entire day is spent in developing one theme or subject,
such as Baptism, the Eucharist, the Christian facing

the modern world, etc. The meeting opens with prayer,
silent and spontaneous. Then they break up into groups
for short classes followed by discussions which are sum-
marized by someone in each group.

After a “Coke break” and singing practice the dis-
cussions are resumed, and the cursillo technique of draw-
ing pictures is introduced. Each student tries to portray
graphically what he has learned. They then proceed to
the Mass, in which all participate actively. Then, after a
transition prayer, they go as a community to dinner,
where there is singing, talking and fun in general. Each
student contributes a part of the dinner. They leave the
dining hall singing and go back to the classrooms for
classes or discussions. Then they sing their way into
church for a Bible vigil.

“These students are enjoying one another. They are
enjoying their day. They are beginning to associate
their religion with an experience which is joyful and in-
teresting rather than dull and monotonous. Christianity
is becoming alive and real where they have constant
contact with it — in the ordinary actions of daily living.”
We might add that it looks as though a lot of solid
learning was being absorbed along with the joyful ex-
perience.

Father Seeber mentions two practical principles which
can govern successful dealing with teen-agers.

1. Unless a teen-ager can see it, eat it, drink it or
go out with it, he is unimpressed.

2. If it’s not fun, don’t do it.
It is only fair to add that we have a report from

Karl Carlson of Santa Maria, California, which is not

35



so enthusiastic. He says that they tried some of the
cursillo techniques in his city and “found the results
good from the students interested in their religion, but
from the disinterested students, the results were not
very exciting.”

GIVING THE TEEN-AGE REBELS
A CAUSE TO LIVE FOR

In the Living Light (Autumn, 1964) Father Joseph
L. Baglio reports something that has been going on in the
region of Minneapolis, Minnesota. High school teen-agers
from both public and parochial schools are brought into
contact with religion in an organization they belong to.
Contact is an association with definite membership. You
become a member by first attending a weekend seminar
and two follow-up seminars. Then you are allowed to
make your commitment. “This sign-up begins a new life
and inaugurates a membership in a revolution which
offers teen-age rebels a cause to live for. It will begin
an adventure in which they will discover for themselves
how to make Christianity relevant to their lives.”

At the center of the Contact movement is the Corps,
a select group of 400 students who are a leaven for the
others (about 2,000).

The Seminar

,

which seems to be the primary edu-
cative institution of the movement, is a three-day “com-
bination of prayer, work, recreation, and discussion, all
focusing on the theme: love — essence of Christianity.
Up to the time of the report 3,182 high school students
had made the seminar. “We think we’re getting closer
to their core,” Father Baglio writes, “letting them dis-
cover deep down inside their own potential for giving
and receiving love, with a proper balance in relation to

36



God, self and neighbor.”
The seminars are held at the retreat house. A priest-

director leads all the discussions, but there are four lay

staff members who sit in as big brothers and sisters.
(I judge from the report that the main part of the
seminar is held on Saturday, apparently all day.) There
are six discussion periods, in which the following subjects
are taken up.

1. What is a Christian? What is bothering you to-
day? Are there Christian answers?

2. Home and family.
3. Sex and chastity.
4. The Mass.
5. Vocation. How do you fit into the world today?
6. The Catholic — lethargic or apostolic?
The attempt is made to let love permeate all the

areas of discussion and all the decisions the young people
finally arrive at.

A certain amount of the maintenance work of the
seminar is done by the students themselves, but not so
much that there is no time for recreation. On Saturday
evening the group leaves the retreat house for some
form of entertainment — roller skating, dancing, a
movie. Then they come back for a final party in the
basement of the Center, with singing and dancing.
“Openness, warmth, self-revelation, joy and humor, be-
ginnings of real friendship, the spirit of belonging” —
all these the students begin to realize in the seminar.

After this all-day session there are two follow-up
nights, which are seminars in miniature. Then those who
wish to be initiated into the movement attend a ceremony
where they sign up for membership. They then become
members of small action groups which are led by teach-
ers, members of the Catholic Center staff and others.

37



The Center maintains a staff of six full-time Contact
organizers who try to create opportunities for Christian
involvement for members of the movement. Students
are trained in special crafts and are sent out as “Peace
Corpsmen, junior grade” to slum areas, interracial
camps, hospitals, Indian reservations, etc. They run in-
terracial workshops and friendship campaigns for honesty
in exams, modesty in dress, etc. And the movement has
adopted a Youth Center in Santiago, Chile.

The members of the Corps, the central institution of
the movement, commit themselves to attend various
meetings and conferences to keep the movement going:
“to renew and revive the seminar spirit, to plan strategic
and concrete action on the home, school, class, city-wide
or person-to-person level.”

“Every diocese, every city, every parish,” says Father
Baglio, “needs to offer its present generation of teen-
agers opportunities for apostolic growth and involve-
ment in the present world crisis. Involvement begets
commitment.”

In this Contact movement we can see elements of the
YCS technique — the continuing organization, the action
groups, and the dedicated central nucleus. There is
probably much more of this kind of work going on in
the country.

AN ALLIANCE BETWEEN
YOUNG MARRIED AND TEENS

One final suggestion: I myself believe that one of
the most effective groups in the Church for getting done
what needs to be done are the young married people who
are sincere Christians. They are busy but they are also
truly dedicated. They have a wonderful sense of re-

38



sponsibility and a certain deftness in carrying things
out. I have met many of them in the Christian Family
Movement. And, incidentally, they are of an age that
teen-agers respect — somewhat older than the ado-
lescents, but not too much older. They do not stand in
any position of authority.

We might get together a fair-sized group of these
people and explain to them the problem of the religious
education of teen-agers. Those who agree to help can
then be trained, not as teachers but as intelligent and
sincere participators in the Mass, participators who can
put their whole selves into the act of worship — their
hearts, souls, minds and voices. A priest who appreciates
the reality of liturgical worship and also the needs of
high school students will train with them, so that they —
priest and people — become a liturgical team, able to
offer the Sacrifice in all its beauty and fullness. By
beauty and fullness I don’t mean elaborate ceremonial
splendor; I mean sincerity and depth with the kind of
outward expression that shows it.

When these people and their priest learn how to wor-
ship fully in community, when their Mass is a “going
concern” with all its liturgical possibilities developed,
then the group — priest and people — can be given one
of the parish Masses on Sunday. The high school stu-
dents whom the CCD wants to reach could then be in-
vited to attend this Mass regularly as friends of the
young married people. I don’t mean friends in a vague
way. I mean that each young family would adopt some
of the high schoolers as their own personal friends and
would make a real effort to get to know them.

This Mass would be the center of the teen-agers’ reli-
gious education. It would not be something added to the
CCD classes; it would be the CCD class. By actually tak-

39



ing part in intelligent worship along with their friends,
by listening to the Word of God and the homily, by join-
ing in with their own minds and voices in prayer and
praise, they will come to know much about their Faith
without undergoing the very annoying teacher-pupil
relationship; and they will have the very best oppor-
tunity that there is for coming to know Christ personally,
for the Mass supplies the very best occasion for a per-
sonal encounter.

Their older sponsors will naturally let their associa-
tion in worship lead to further association in Christian
work and recreation, so that the young people will be-
come more and more integrated into a Christian society
and its esprit de corps, and the tone of the Christian
society itself will be raised by their participation in it.

If some of the teen-agers want to learn more about
certain phases of the Faith they should certainly have
the opportunity. Anyone in the parish who is able to
teach them should be drafted to do it. In our parish, for
instance, there was a demand for a discussion of Church
history to go along with the history that they were
studying in the public high school. Whoever wishes to
learn should have his wish fulfilled by the giving of
courses or seminars; but all this must be purely voluntary.

MASS COMBINED
WITH CLASS

Jerry Stein, of Kalamazoo, Michigan, suggests a
modification of this plan. Have the Mass, he says, in
which the students participate to the full, and then have
short, 15-minute classes afterward, on subjects that they
should become acquainted with, led by teachers who are
qualified. “Hand each student a 5- to 10-question form

40



after class with true and false or multiple choice answers
on the Mass, homily, lecture, etc. The paper to be re-
turned with the parent’s signature the following week.”

When our plan of having the Mass rather than the
class the center of the religious education of teen-agers

wras proposed, a letter came immediately from Father
Blase Schauer, O.P., director of the Newman Center at
New Mexico State University, University Park, New
Mexico. He said that we would find the plan incarnate
at his place. We wrote at once for details, and received
information of what seems to be the most carefully
worked out and most totally applied plan of teaching by
means of the Liturgy that exists anywhere. The plan was
made for university students but I’m sure it could be
adjusted to the needs of high schoolers just as the
cursillo technique has been adjusted.

“The Eucharistic Sacrifice is the heartbeat of the
entire program.” You can see that by looking at what
they do there. “The inventiveness with which chaplain
and students seek an approach to God that is fresh,
relevant, creative and joyous” is remarked by one ob-
server. The program aims at the total involvement of
religion in the life of the student.

The students here had a remarkable opportunity for
participation in the Liturgy in a way more basic than is
possible for most people: they helped build and decorate
their own chapel! Thus they could even prepare the place
where they could later assist in offering the Sacrifice.
And they continue this remote participation. They make
the candles; they bake the altar breads (in an adobe oven
in the yard)

;
they have special decorations for the dif-

ferent feasts and seasons. They have dramatic produc-
tions paralleling the Liturgical Year, and Bible vigils with
readings relevant to what is being celebrated in the Mass

41



of the time. The students thus have a feeling that they
are in on the ground floor in their participation.

At the Mass itself the students take all the part they
can. They are the commentators, the lectors, the acolytes
and the hymn leaders. There is great emphasis on sing-
ing. Father Schauer is himself a musician and has made
a deep study of the use of music in creating his religious
community. A visitor reports that the students have a
“fair fluency” in 108 hymns. Judging from the evidence,
they are prepared to sing at a moment’s notice. A visitor
was told beforehand that she would find the Mass a holy
hootenanny, and when she got there she found that the
description was not far wrong. This does not mean that
there was anything objectionable about it. The visitor
was much impressed. She saw “how easily the formal
drama and the tender personal music moved together.”

It seems from all the evidence that a real Catholic
community is in existence here including chaplain, faculty
and students. Everyone knows that he belongs and they
rejoice in doing things together, and above all in wor-
shiping together. They study together to make the
worship more real. Here is an example of what Catholic
students in a secular school can do if they are led by
a person who can see the possibilities and has the imagi-
nation to carry them out. Here is a departure from the
conventional ways of religious instruction which reveals
to all who are concerned in it a reality in religion which
they never even thought of before.

42



V

Conclusions

That original editorial in the Ave Maria triggered
much thinking, and brought to general notice some very
fine things that are being done in the way of new experi-
ments in teaching religion to high school students. We
found in the replies to the editorial not only a seconding
of the statement that something must be done and done
quickly. But there was a great flow of positive sugges-
tions — new things to be done and new ways to do the
old things. We have given examples of this.

Are there any definite conclusions that we can gather
from all this wealth of material? Do these many people
who have replied to us agree in anything?

43



• The most notable point agreed on is that before the
instruction that we give to these young people can sink
in, there must be some genuine experience of Christ,
some encounter with Him, some commitment to Him.
The bringing about of this experience or encounter or
commitment has to be our first and most important
effort. We have to direct our prayers and our attention
and our cares to that. It is the failure to bring this about
that has made our previous efforts fall so flat.

• But is there any technique, any recognized method,
by which we can make such experience happen in a teen-
ager? Most of our correspondents agree that the con-
ventional methods of the classroom won’t often make it
happen. The teacher-student relationship does, not en-
courage it. Even when we keep the classroom we must
go outside it if we are to lead these students to want to
come into it.

• But there is also agreement on the positive side.
Young people meet Christ in a community, not at
first in solitude. Their meeting with Him and their
real, deep meeting with one another seem to be two
parts of one great meeting, where the same love cir-
culates between Christ and myself, and between Christ
and every other single member of the community, be-
tween myself and every other member, and between
every other single member and all the rest. It is definitely
a communal experience. In the past we have neglected
to provide for this communal experience. Members of a
class, even a Christian Doctrine class, have most often
been seen as rivals of one another, uniting only in op-
position to the teacher.

44



There is agreement, too, in at least some of the ways
that help to bring about a community. You can’t make
one, but you can help one to happen.

• In all the plans that have been presented here the
element of joy has been stressed. Common joy, shared
joy, is a great former of comradeship. Father Seeber
set out to let his students have a really joyous day. Joy
is not a superficial belly-laugh happiness; it is a deep
down happiness. It doesn’t come from a constant patter
of jokes. It comes when everyone has a reason to be
glad, a reason that becomes clearer to him as time goes
on. Therefore you are joyful when a serious undertaking
is going well. There is thanksgiving in it; there is work-
ing-together in it; there is playing-together in it; there

is praying-together in it.
And all these plans, as far as any details of them have

been given us, use singing, much singing, as the expres-
sion of joy and the means of spreading the joy. We
Catholics have neglected singing most shamefully. Our
hymns have been whiney, no joy to sing and no strength
in the words. But the teen-age generation is now ap-
preciating song and words — words with spiritual mean-
ing — as they haven’t done before. It is time for a real
apostolate of music to rise among us.

• All these plans use the Mass, not learning about the
Mass but taking part in the Mass, as the center of their
community action. The Mass is not just an obligation
that the students must fulfill. It is the central means
of education, the point around which all other elements
in the scheme cluster. It is the great action which gives
life and meaning to the other actions.

45



• In the sum total experience brought about by all
these elements which go to make up the community,
the student in one way or another, at one time or another,
encounters Christ; and Christ becomes more real and
close and relevant to him as the community life goes on.
When this encounter is made, and as this sense of close-
ness and relevance continues and increases, then the stu-
dent wants to learn more about this Christ. This is the
time for instruction to be given him, and given in a way
that keeps him close to Christ.

Our replies show that people are now seeing this right
order of things in the Christian education of adolescents.

We hope that this record of what is being suggested and
thought and done about our great problem of education
will be a help for those people all over the country who
are earnestly looking for a solution to their own problem
of education in their own parish and community.

46



Catechist’s Own Library

This bibliography, compiled by Gerard A. Pottebaum, catechetics

editor, George A. Pflaum, Publisher, Inc., recommends the better cate-
chetical works. It lists 13 titles recommended as basic necessities for the
catechist’s personal library. All titles are available from Pflaum Cate-
chetical Distribution Service, 38 West Fifth Street, Dayton, Ohio 45402.

The Holy Bible
, Confraternity of Christian Doctrine Translation. ($3.69.)

New Testament Reading Guide (1962). Various authors. Fourteen
booklets. Introduction to N. T. Gospels of Sts. Mark, Luke, and
Matthew. Acts of Apostles. Introduction to Pauline Epistles, 1-2

Thessalonians. Epistles to Galatians, Romans. First and Second
Corinthians. Philippians, Ephesians, Golossians, Philomen. St. Paul’s

Pastoral Epistles. Epistles to Hebrews. Epistles of Sts. James, Jude,
Peter. Gospel of St. John and the Johannine Epistles. Book of
Apocalypse. (Set: $4.20; 30 cents each.)

Old Testament Reading Guide (1965). The Books of Josua and Judges,
Ignatius Hunt, O.S.B.; The Book of Deuteronomy, Raymond E.
Brown, S.S.; Introduction to the Prophetical Books, Bruce Vawter,
G.M.

;
The Book of Isaiah—Chapters 40-66, Carroll Stuhlmueller,

C.P.; Introduction to the Wisdom Literature of the O.T., Roland E.
Murphy, O. Carm.; The Book of Proverbs and the Book of Sirach,
Ernest Lussier, S.S.S. (Set: $2.40; 40 cents each.)

Approaches to the Bible: The Old Testament (1963), Aldo J. Tos. An
introductory study of Scripture with emphasis on the O.T. (Spiral
binding: $5.50.)

St. Andrew’s Bible Missal (1963). Scriptural references to current litur-
gical celebrations and explanations to Epistles and Gospels in light of
the biblical account. ($7.75; Plastic: $6.95.)

47



Of Sacraments and Sacrifice (1962), Clifford Howell, S.J. Treats the
Mass and sacraments in a way that is lively and meaningful. (90
cents.)

The Signs of the New Covenant (1964), A. G. Martimort. A complete
treatment of the sacraments. ($2.25.)

The Art of Teaching Christian Doctrine (1957), Johannes Hofinger, S.J.
Review of the goals of modern catechetics. 30 lessons in the keryg-
matic approach to adult instruction. ($4.95.)

Modern Challenge to Religious Education (1961), Bishop G. Emmet
Garter. An introduction to religious education—its techniques and
difficulties. ($5.36; paper: $3.25.)

The Faith Explained (1961), Father Leo J. Trese. Commentary on
Baltimore Catechism No. 3. ($2.50.)

A Catholic Catechism (1962), the famous catechism developed in Ger-
many. Paperback is titled, The Living Faith. ($4.95; paper: $1.50.)

Cure of Mind and Cure of Soul (1962), Rev. Josef Goldbrunner. Recog-
nizes the new situation facing Christianity. No longer is the priest and
educator confronted with a “body of the faithful.” He must reach
each soul. (95 cents.)

Love or Constraint? (1959), Marc Oraison. Shows religious education
as a process enabling the child to arrive at a true knowledge of God.

(95 cents.)

48