323 WEST TT r r
CHURCHWEST

ILLINOIS
STREET

A NATIONAL

INVENTORY

OF PARISH

CATECHETICAL

PROGRAMS

Conducted by

The United States

Catholic Conference

in cooperation with

The Boys Town Center

for the Study of

Youth Development

—

The Catholic University

of America



Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2016

https://archive.org/details/nationalinventorOOunit



A NATIONAL

INVENTORY

OF PARISH

CATECHETICAL

PROGRAMS

Conducted by

The United States

Catholic Conference

in cooperation with

The Boys Town Center

for the Study of

Youth Development

—

The Catholic University

of America

1978

PUBLICATIONS OFFICE

UNITED STATES CATHOLIC CONFERENCE

1312 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20005



Copyright © 1978, United States Catholic Conference

DeacMfflsd



CONTENTS

The National Inventory of Parish Catechetical Programs .... 1

History of Inventory 5

Part I

A Portrait of the Persons Who Are Responsible for

Parish Catechetical Programs 13

Educational Background and Continuing Education

of DREs 19

The DRE as Employee 24

Part II

Catechetical Ministries 33

Part III

The Support Systems of Parish Catechetical Programs 43

Summary 51

Support for Catechetical Programs 55

Conclusion 57

i



Page

FIGURES Nos.

Figure 1 Characteristics of the Director or Coordinator 2

Figure 2 Types of Ministries 3

Figure 3 Current Support for Ministry 3

Figure 4 The Distribution of Returned Questionnaires Accord-

ing to Regions 7

Figure 5 The Location of Parishes Responding to the National

Inventory of Parish Catechetical Programs 8

Figure 6 The Number of Families within Parishes Responding

to the National Inventory of Parsh Catechetical Pro-

grams 8

Figure 7 Ethnic and Racial Background of Parishes Respond-

ing to the National Inventory of Parish Catechetical

Programs 9

Figure 8 The Vocational Status of the Respondents and their

Locations 9

Figure 9 The Location of Parishes Not Responding to the Na-

tional Inventory of Parish Catechetcial Programs 10

Figure 10 The Number of Families within a Parish Not Respond-

ing to the National Inventory of Parish Catechetical

Programs 10

Figure 11 Ethnic and Racial Background of Parishes Not Re-

sponding to the National Inventory of Parish Cate-

chetical Programs 11

Figure 12 Age Distribution of DREs 14

Figure 13 Vocational Status of DREs 14

Figure 14 Age Range of DREs 15

Figure 15 Total Number of Diocesan Seminarians and Priests

in U.S. Catholic Dioceses, 1955-75 17

Figure 16 Distribution of Salaries for Paid DREs 25

Figure 17 Vocational Status of DREs in Relation to Salary 25

Figure 18 Distribution of Hours Per Week DREs Expend 27

Figure 19 Vocational Status of DREs Reporting a Role Descrip-

tion 28

Figure 20 Vocational Status of DRE and Number of Years in the

Same Parish 29



TABLES

Page

Nos.

Table 1 The Comparison of College Education with Vocational

Status 19

Table 2 The Comparison of Graduate Degrees with Vocational

Status 20

Table 3 Continuing Education within the Last Two Years 20

Table 4 Reading Habits of DREs 21

Table 5 A DREs Contact with Peers 21

Table 6 The Relationship Between the Hours Per Week a DRE

Expends and His or Her Monthly Salary 26

Table 7 Percentage of “Yes" Responses to the Various Grade

Levels That Fall Under the Responsibility of DREs 26

Table 8 Percentage of “Yes" Responses to Additional Minis-

tries DREs Undertake 27

Table 9 DRE Years in Present Parish 28

Table 10 The Comparison of DREs with and without a Role

Description and Hours Per Week Expended 30

Table 11 Location and Time Input of DREs 30

Table 12 Yearly Average of Adults Who Attend Adult Education

And Family Ministry Programs 33

Table 13 Frequency of Family Ministry Programs 34

Table 14 Frequency of Adult Education Programs 35

Table 15 Special Education Programs within the Area of the

Parish 35

Table 16 Catechetical Assistance for Handicapped 36

Table 17 Considerations for Handicapped 36

Table 18 Classes Per Year 37

Table 19 Location of Classes 37

Table 20 Services by Parishes for Youth 38

Table 21 Frequency of Parish Services for Youth 38

Table 22 Youth Services in the Parish 39

Table 23 Parent Participation in Sacramental Preparation 44

Table 24 Priests’ Involvement in Catechetical Functions 44

iii



Page

Nos.

Table 25 Complementary Services to Catechetical Programs on

the Primary Level 45

Table 26 Percentage of Certified Teachers on the Primary Level 46

Table 27 Catechetical Support from Higher Education, Parish

Libraries & Certification Programs 46

Table 28 Educational Hardware 46

Table 29 The Comparison of Parishes with or without a Catholic

School and whether there is a Catechetical Budget 47

Table 30 The Location of Parishes which have a Parish Cate-

chetical Budget 47

IV



THE NATIONAL INVENTORY

OF PARISH CATECHETICAL PROGRAMS

Introduction

The National Inventory of Parish Catechetical Programs

is the first effort of its kind to examine the status of Catholic

catechesis throughout the country. The study focuses on parish

catechetical programs that are not within the Catholic school

system. In some places, these programs are identified by the name

Confraternity of Christian Doctrine (CCD).

The study was undertaken in response to the need for a

comprehensive understanding of the structures and personnel in

the evolving area of parish catechesis. In the past the main bul-

wark of catechetical ministry for youth was the Catholic school.

Discussion groups, parish sodalities, occasional missions, and

guest speakers served the catechetcal needs of the adult popula-

tion. These structures were—and in many places still are

—

extremely effective in complementing catechesis. No longer, how-

ever, do they dominate the scene as they did in the past.

The catechetical scene has expanded beyond the classroom

in serving the faith needs not only of youth, but also adults.

Retreat movements, greater involvement in the liturgy, and field

experiences are some of the new models being employed in the

catechesis of young people. Catechetical ministry has likewise

broadened its perimeters to respond to a much wider diversity of

needs found in the adult population. Family ministry, ministry to

the elderly, the sick, and the dying are among the many new serv-

ices offered adults.

As this shift in emphasis has grown, it has generated a re-

thinking of catechetical needs and a re-structuring to meet them.

1



The National Inventory of Parish Catechetical Programs is de-

signed to assess the resources and structures upon which cate-

chesis in our country depends.

Three basic concerns are at the heart of the Inventory. The

first of these concerns relates to the persons, usually called

coordinators or directors, most responsible for meeting the day-

to-day catechetical needs of a parish. What can be said of their

age, vocational status, ethnic background, and educational level?

What is the salary of a coordinator or director? What is the ratio

of those who have a role description of their work to those who

have none; of volunteer to paid administrators; of newcomers to

seasoned directors; of those doing the job alone to those who are

working in a team? What range of functions do directors perform

and how much time do they allot to each? See Figure 1.

Figure 1.

CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DIRECTOR OR COORDINATOR

il. ill.

In Him/ Herself As Educated Person As Employee

— Sex. Question
2* (Q.2)

— Age (Q. 3)

— Position in Life
(Q.5)

— Ethnic
Background

(Q.20)

— Educational
Background

(Q.6) (Q.21)

— Reading
Background

(Q.19)

— Contact with
other Educators

(Q17)

— Salary (Q.4)
— Longevity on Job (Q.7)
— Other Jobs of Some Nature

(Q-9) (Q.10)

— Range of Responsibilities
(Q-8) (Q.14)

— Priorities on Job (Q.19)
— Input Time/Work (Q.15)
— Boundaries of Work (Q.6)
— Job Description (Q.ll)

(Q.13)

The first area of focus of this survey therefore concerns the

decision-maker most responsible for setting the tone of parish

catechesis. The questions address themselves to the background

of those leaders responsible for inspiring catechetical models on

the parochial level.

The second area of concern is with the various catechetical

ministries: adult education and ministry to the family, youth, the

handicapped, and formal religious education. How many such

ministries in fact exist? How frequently does the parish community

become involved with them?

* The questionnaire, the National Inventory of Parish Catechetical Pro-

grams, is found in the appendix.

2



Here the study shifts to those who are served by the parish.

It asks whether the youth and adult populations are being exposed

to the wide range of catechetical ministries that are available. If

so, to what degree is the exposure being felt? See Figure 2.

Figure 2.

TYPES OF MINISTRIES

1. II. III. IV. V. VI.

To Adults To Family

To Handi-

capped To Youth

To Primary

Education

To Second-

ary

Education

(Q.31) (Q.32) (Q.36, 37) (Q-48, (Q.42, 35) (Q.50)

49, 52, 54)

Lastly, the Inventory is concerned with the various support

systems that are needed if shared responsibility is to be an in-

tegral part of catechesis. How much support is received from

parishioners, clergy, and the dioceses? Do the teachers who are

responsible for formal catechetical instruction, likewise receive

educational and spiritual support? See Figure 3.

Figure 3.

CURRENT SUPPORT FOR MINISTRY

1 . ll. III. IV.

Clergy Parish Diocesan Educational and

Participation Support Support Spiritual Support

(Q-29) — Parishioner
Involvement

(Q.33, 34, 39,

40)

— Parish Budget
(Q.57)

— Parish
Facilities

(Q.56, 58, 59)

(Q.30) (Q.44, 45, 46, 47, 53,

The future builds on the present. The statistics are an at-

tempt to understand whether basic structures, without which

catechesis cannot exist, are present. Proper interpretation of the

statistics requires a current understanding of the field. To be of

value the study must further be seen through the eyes of a

futurologist who says, “If this be the status quo, what must we

3



do now so that in the 1980’s catechesis will be stronger and

greatly improved?”

The Inventory is the result of considerable consultation.

Special thanks are due Bishop Thomas C. Kelly, O.P., General

Secretary of the United States Catholic Conference (USCC), Mon-

signor Wilfrid H. Paradis, Secretary for Education, USCC, Mon-

signor Thomas J. Leonard, Associate Secretary for Education,

USCC, and the staff of the Department of Education, USCC.

Particular acknowledgement must also be made of the con-

tribution of Dr. James O’Connor, Director of the Boys Town

Research Center at Catholic University, where the data were

processed and analyzed, Reverend Raymond H. Potvin, chief con-

sultant on the questionnaire design, and Doctors Dean R. Hoge,

Andrew D. Thompson, Hart M. Nelsen, and the Reverend Paul J.

Philibert, O.P. for their consultation and encouraging support.

A grant from the Scholl Foundation provided for many of the

expenses of the study. Much credit must go to the National Con-

ference of Diocesan Directors, (NCDD), the Association of Di-

rectors of Graduate Religious Education Programs (ADGREP),

Brother Bernard Glos, O.S.B., Monsignor William B. Friend,

Brother Joseph Moloney, Dr. Barbara McKillop, and the many

diocesan directors who helped pre-test the first three drafts of the

survey instrument.

Finally, thanks must be given to Theresa Lennon, Joseph

Shields, Mary Jean Verdieck, Diane Martin, Chuck Talar, Peggy

O’Reilly, and Mohammud Khan for their help in processing and

analyzing the data.

Eugene F. Hemrick

Chief Investigator

4



HISTORY OF INVENTORY

We distinguish five phases in the research project: (1) Pre-

liminary Preparation, (2) Data Collection, (3) Data Processing,

(4) Analysis and Preparation of the Report, and (5) Review of the

Report.

Preliminary Preparation

Work on the Inventory was begun by the United States Cath-

olic Conference in August, 1975, when a letter was sent to sev-

eral dioceses throughout the country requesting samples of

questionaires they might be employing to assess their catechetical

programs. About half of the dioceses contacted replied by sending

survey instruments. The other dioceses reported they had no such

questionnaires. Many of these dioceses said that they would wel-

come help in constructing one. This latter fact, coupled with re-

flection on the guidelines of the National Catechetical Directory

emphasizing the need for catechetical research, reinforced our

conviction that a study was needed. 1 Another supporting reason

for the study was found in an article in Momentum in which Dr.

William McCready bemoaned the fact that no real research had

been done in the area of CCD. 2

What to study was the first question. Examination of all the

research and symposia papers that have reported on the positive

and negative aspects of catechetics made it clear that these works

presumed a catechetical structure about which we have very little

data. To give one example, youth ministry has been fairly well

defined. On paper, it is a modern response to the problem of

making contact with the missing 3.2 million youth of high school

1 Sharing the Light Of Faith: National Catechetical Directory for Catholics

Of the United States, United States Catholic Conference, 1312 Massachu-

setts Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005, 1978.

2 Feistritzer, Patricia, "American Catholics Want Catholic Schools,"

Momentum, May, 1976, p. 20.

5



age who are not receiving formal religious education and of vitaliz-

ing the faith of youth already deeply involved in religion.
3
But, it

had to be asked, how many parishes are actually aware of or

engaged in this ministry? Do parishes provide the various struc-

tures that compose youth ministry?

Because of reasoning along these lines, it was argued that

an inventory was needed to assess the range of catechetical

functions actually fostered by parishes and the personnel who are

responsible for administering them.

Data Collection

Once the rationale for the Inventory was established, parish

and diocesan directors, deans of graduate schools for religious

studies, the Department of Education of the USCC, and prominent

sociologists were asked to supply items for the survey instrument.

After several drafts and pre-tests the finalized instrument

was sent to 330 bishops and 158 diocesan directors of cateche-

tics with a note informing them that the questionnaire would be

used for a national study. Their assistance in facilitating the study

was solicited.

The Official Catholic Directory published by P. J. Kenedy &

Sons was then consulted and every 10th parish throughout the

country was chosen for the survey. Since the Directory at times

has been found to be inaccurate, the names of parishes selected

randomly in each diocese were sent directly to the diocesan di-

rector, who was asked to forward the questionnaire to the person

in each parish considered most responsible for its catechetical

program. The director was also asked to check the addresses for

possible corrections. Thanks to outstanding cooperation by the

diocesan directors, 1059 completed questionnaires—59% out of
1810—were returned to the national office.

In order to understand the background of the data of the

Inventory, the following graphs have been constructed reflecting

the percentage of replies from each region, and the location, size,

ethnic, and racial composition of the parishes that responded and

did not respond.

Figure 4 gives the breakdown of respondents according to

the 12 regions of the country.

Paradis, Wilfrid, H., and Andrew D. Thompson, Where Are the 6.6

Million?, United States Catholic Conference, Washington, D.C., 1976, p. 1.

6



FIGURE

4

THE

DISTRIBUTION

OF

RETURNED

QUESTIONNAIRES

ACCORDING

TO

REGIONS

7



Figure 5 shows that 59% of the parishes responding to the

Inventory are in small cities or rural areas. Another 34% are in
major cities (500,000 to 1,000,000) or suburbs, and 7% of the
responses come from major cities with a population over 1,000,-

00°- FIGURES

THE LOCATION OF PARISHES RESPONDING TO THE NATIONAL

INVENTORY OF PARISH CATECHETICAL PROGRAMS

31 % N = 951

City Over 50,000 to Suburb City Town/Rural

1,000,000 1,000,000

Figure 6 shows that parishes with less than 1,000 families

represent almost two thirds of the total respondents to the Inven-

t0ry
- FIGURE 6

THE NUMBER OF FAMILIES WITHIN PARISHES RESPONDING TO THE
NATIONAL INVENTORY OF PARISH CATECHETICAL PROGRAMS

41 %

Families

8



Figure 7 shows that the ethnic and racial background of the

parishes studied is predominantly Caucasian.

FIGURE 7

ETHNIC AND RACIAL BACKGROUND OF PARISHES RESPONDING TO THE

NATIONAL INVENTORY OF PARISH CATECHETICAL PROGRAMS
87%

N =l

4%

1 1

5%
3%

1

1

1%

Caucasion1 Black Hispanic Native American Oriental

Figure 8 shows the location of lay persons, sisters and priests

who responded.

FIGURE 8

THE VOCATIONAL STATUS OF THE RESPONDENTS AND THEIR LOCATIONS 41 %

Laity

Sisters

Priests

8% 8%

4%
CO CO

>. 3 GO

CO
To

0)

_i <z> CL

High Major

City

N = 322

N = 298

N = 282

24%

19%

16%

II

13°^0

CO CO

CD

w
Vi
0

CO ol

18%

12%

Major

City

Major City

Suburb

35%

32%

26% 27%

Small City Small

Town/Rural

9

Priests



Seven hundred fifty one parishes, 41%, did not return the

questionnaires sent to them. Figures 9, 10 and 11 describe where

these parishes are located, the number of families in them and

their ethnic and racial background.

FIGURE 9

THE LOCATION OF PARISHES NOT RESPONDING TO THE NATIONAL

INVENTORY OF PARISH CATECHETICAL PROGRAMS

29%

City Over 50,000 to Suburb City Town/Rural

1
,
000,000 1

,
000,000

FIGURE 10

THE NUMBER OF FAMILIES WITHIN A PARISH NOT RESPONDING TO THE

45
o
/o

NATIONAL INVENTORY OF PARISH CATECHETICAL PROGRAMS

Families

10



81 %

FIGURE 11

ETHNIC AND RACIAL BACKGROUND OF PARISHES NOT

RESPONDING TO THE NATIONAL INVENTORY OF PARISH

American

It should be noted that although 1059 questionnaires were

coded, often the actual number of respondents (N) to a particular

question is much below the number 1059. This may be the result

of several reasons:

1. In the case of specific information—for example, the
percentages of persons of particular racial and ethnic

backgrounds in a parish—the respondent may have opted
to leave the question blank because the information was

not available and it would be too time-consuming to

obtain it.

2. Some respondents who failed to respond may have meant

in this way to indicate a “no” answer to a “yes-or-no”

question.

3. For personal reasons a respondent may feel that a cer-

tain question does not deserve a response.

11



4. A respondent might accidentally skip a question.

5. A respondent might respond improperly and invalidate

his or her response.

The reader should be aware of the variance in the number

of responses (N) as he or she interprets the percentages in the

tables and figures.

Data Processing

Preparation of the data for analysis began almost as soon as

the questionnaires were returned. Each questionnaire required six

IBM cards to record the responses to the 60 items composing the

Inventory.

Analysis and Preparation of the Report

Once the data were processed, the responses were analyzed

to see with what frequency they appeared. As the frequency of

each response was analyzed, cross tabulations were suggested

and tables were designed to study various comparisons.

Before any conclusions were drawn the frequencies and

tables were reviewed by means of in-depth interviews with per-

sons throughout the country who had participated in the study.

They were asked to reflect on each set of responses and comment

on what the information indicated to them. Many of the ideas in

the sections of the report which are entitled “Questions Raised

by the Data" are the result of this process.

Review of the Report

The report of the Inventory has been sent to every bishop

and diocesan director of catechetics for their review. Up to this

point nine dioceses have requested that the Inventory be used to

do a 100% study of their parish catechetical programs.

Format of the Report

The report is organized in four parts:

(1) Frequency of responses resulting from each question;

(2) Cross tabulations suggested by the data; (3) Questions raised

by the data; (4) Summary and considerations for the future.

12



PART I

A PORTRAIT OF THE PERSONS WHO ARE
RESPONSIBLE FOR PARISH CATECHETICAL

PROGRAMS

Formal Title

Sex & Age

Status & Ethnic & Racial Background

The National Inventory of Parish Catechetical Programs

begins by asking the person designated most responsible for

parish catechetical programs, “What is your formal title in regard

to catechetics?” Of the 1020 responding, 51% say they are called

coordinators, 32% are called directors, 9% are pastors, and

8% have other titles, such as principal, facilitator, chairperson,
assistant pastor, administrator, religious education consultant,

and pastoral minister. (Throughout the remainder of the study

the abbreviation DRE, Director of Religious Education, will repre-

sent the various titles.)

Women outnumber men 59% to 41% among DREs.

Figure 12 indicates the age distribution of DREs between 21

and 61.

Lay persons compose the largest group of DREs, with a 35%
representation. Religious sisters are next with a 29% representa-
tion, and priests follow very closely at 28%. At the bottom of the

list are religious brothers with 7% representation and permanent
deacons and seminarians, both at less than 1% * See Figure 13.

* Since religious brothers, permanent deacons, and seminarians make

up less than 9% of the population of DREs when comparisons are made
that require vocational status, only priests, sisters, and lay persons will be

included in the figures and tables that follow.

13



FIGURE 12

19% AGE DISTRIBUTION OF DREs

VOCATIONAL STATUS OF DREs

Laity Sisters Priests Bros. Perm. Seminarians

Deacons

14



Of those priests reporting they are DREs, 71% are pastors,
27% are either assistant or associate pastors. Diocesan priests
not assigned to a particular parish and priests belonging to a
religious order account for 1% each.

When priests, sisters, and brothers are combined and com-
pared with the laity, it becomes apparent that about two-thirds of
the parish catechetical programs are directed by priests, religious
sisters, or brothers.

Of the 955 DREs who reported their racial and ethnic back-
ground, white Caucasian-Americans predominate, with an 85%
representation. Hispanics are 9%, Blacks 2%, Native Americans
2%, and Orientals 2%.

Figure 14 relates age to vocation in life for the DREs. It
shows a downward trend in the number of lay DREs as age in-
creases, while the numbers of priests and sisters increase as age
increases.

FIGURE 14

AGE RANGE OF DREs

Laity

Sisters

Priests

30%

(N = 354)

(N = 301)

(N = 291)

30%

11 %

Ages 21-30

28%

19%

31-40

37%
36%

33%

28%

23%

16%

41-50 51

15



Questions Raised By the Data On

Age and Vocational Status

Ethnic and Racial Background

The Vitality of the DRE

In follow-up interviews on the findings of the Inventory,

several basic questions were immediately raised because of the

statistics on age, vocational status, and ethnic and racial back-

ground. One DRE, looking at the statistics in Figure 14, candidly

remarked, “I fall into that 23% category under lay person. I am

in my early forties, have been on the job for six years as a favor

to the pastor, and am just about ready to call it quits.” She then

told of going to a coordinators’ meeting. While listening to a

lecture there she looked around the room and saw five other

coordinators who, as she described them, looked burned-out and

lifeless. She ended her remarks by saying that she prayed God

would give her the wisdom to get out before she reached that

stage.

The discussion that followed this comment led to the fol-

lowing questions:

• What is being done by dioceses and parishes with persons

who have served religious education for a considerable

length of time and feel it is time to step down? Do we try to

retain them until they collapse? Are DREs offered alternatives

in the area of catechetics that offer a change of atmosphere

and subsequent relief? Are mini-sabbaticals encouraged and

supported?

• Is there a feedback system whereby a diocese or parish

monitors a DRE's endurance level and is able to detect

fatigue before it reaches a critical point?

• Do policies address the question of incentive as a means

for sustaining vitality for the DRE position?

• Have we built into the office of DRE protections, such as

clearly defined role descriptions, that help insure against

over-extension?

• Once a person reaches the level of DRE, is that it? Within

the position itself are there further levels of achievement

for which a DRE can strive?

Religious Vocations As the Bulwark of Catechesis?

When Figure 14 was reviewed by a group of priests familiar

16



with the statistics in Figure 15 below, the fact that one-third

of the priests and one-third of the sisters serving as DREs are 51

or older became a point of discussion.

• If vocations to the priesthood and sisterhood continue to fall

short of meeting the demands of the Catholic population,

who will replace these sisters and priests in the 51-and-over

age category?

• If, as it seems, catechetics will need to be carried out pre-

dominantly by the laity in the future, are recruitment policies,

budget planning, and preparation of a mentality underway to

accommodate and encourage lay administration?

FIGURE 15

TOTAL NUMBER OF DIOCESAN SEMINARIANS AND PRIESTS
IN U.S. CATHOLIC DIOCESES, 1955-75

A

A. Source: Official Catholic Directory

B. The projected decline between 1975 and 1985, indicated by a

broken line, is based on data presented in an article in the

“National Catholic Reporter,” May 5, 1978, p. 4.

C. Seminarians

The Minorities Who in Some Places Have Already Become the
Majority

The fact that only 13% of the parishes responding to the
Inventory are of some other ethnic and racial background than

17



white Caucasian and that a low percentage of DREs are found

among the minorities raises some serious questions. Another

study seems needed which focuses on the minorities solely to

determine the status of leadership among them. Such a study

might assess whether low visibility is the result of organizational

difficulties or arises from the fact that leadership which gives

visibility has not yet developed. The study might further investi-

gate whether minority groups are making an effort to accept their

own members as leaders. It might ask if white Caucasian-Amer-

ican leadership among minorities is encouraging “home rule.” Is

the mentality prevalent which considers the minorities still in-

capable of managing themselves, or is the “bootstrap” mentality

present which believes that the best way to serve others is to

encourage them to develop their leadership?

One question plaguing many interviewed in the southwest

part of the country is the possible loss to the Church of Hispanic

youth if Hispanic leadership in catechetics is not cultivated.

18



EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND
AND

CONTINUING EDUCATION

OF DREs

Degrees, Continuing Education,

Reading, Contact with Peers

After establishing the identity of persons most responsible

for parish catechesis, the Inventory is next concerned with the

educational background of the DRE: “What is the average educa-

tional level of the DRE and how is it being updated and sup-

ported?"

Table 1 shows that of the three major groups of DREs, most

sisters and priests have had four years of college, whereas 32%
of the lay persons report having had no college education.

Table 1

THE COMPARISON OF COLLEGE EDUCATION WITH

VOCATIONAL STATUS

No

College 1 Yr. 2 Yrs. 3 Yrs. 4 Yrs. N

Lay Persons 32% 8% 7% 5% 48% = 100% (N = 271)

Sisters 2% 1% 3% 3% 91% = 100% (N - 193)

Priests 0% 0% 0% 3% 97% = 100% (N == 180)

Table 2 shows that one-third of the DREs who are lay per-

sons, approximately one-half the priests, and two-thirds of the

sisters have graduate degrees. See Table 2.

19



Table 2

THE COMPARISON OF GRADUATE DEGREES WITH

VOCATIONAL STATUS

No

Degree MA/MS Ph.D.

Profes-

sional

Degree

Religious

Education N

Lay Persons 66% 27% 0% 4% 3% = 100% (N = 259)

Sisters 32% 57% 0% 5% 6% = 100% (N = 278)

Priests 49% 23% 1% 2% 25% = 100% (N = 274)

Table 3 reflects two dimensions of concern in the area of

continuing education. The first dimension of the table assesses

the means DREs utilize in order to continue their education. The

statistics under the column Workshop show that a high percentage

of DREs use this mode of education more frequently than taking

undergraduate or graduate courses to continue their education.

The second dimension of Table 3 is concerned with course

matter DREs pursue. The subject matter most frequently pursued

in workshops is religious education. Educational methodology

and courses in administration are more frequently chosen on the

undergraduate level. On the graduate level DREs favor theology.

Table 3

CONTINUING EDUCATION WITHIN THE LAST TWO YEARS
IF YES, IN THE SETTING OF:

No Courses If Yes, in the Setting of:

Educational Experience or Undergrad Graduate

in the Last Two Years Workshops Workshops Courses Courses N

Theology 13% 53% 8% 26% = 100% (N = 847)

Educational

Methodology 28% 47% 10% 15% = 100% (N = 732)

Administration 47% 32% 10% 10% = 100% (N = 761)

Counselling 36% 43% 6% 15% = 100% (N = 781)

Religious Education 16% 61% 6% 17% = 100% (N = 827)

Table 4 examines the reading habits of DREs. Data under the

Never column show that very few DREs report no reading in

religious education, theology, and education. Religious education

journals and articles are somewhat more frequently read than

those dealing with theology and education.

20



Table 4

READING HABITS OF DREs

Very Very

Never Little Moderate Frequently Frequently N

Religious

Education

Articles/

Journals 4% 10% 24% 22% 40% = 100% (N = 879)

Theology

Articles/

Journals 4% 14% 25% 27% 30% = 100% (N = 859)

Educational

Articles/

Journals 7% 20% 26% 19% 23% = 100% (N = 849)

Table 5 reflects how often a DRE takes advantage of possible

contact opportunities with peers for gaining a sense of shared

responsibility and receiving new insights into his or her work. In

the row designated Never it is shown that approximately one

fourth of the DREs do not come together for diocesan meetings

or meet with DREs in neighboring parishes. DREs who attend

diocesan meetings most frequently meet on a semester or yearly

basis, whereas when they meet with DREs from neighboring

parishes they are more likely to meet on a monthly basis.

Table 5

A DREs CONTACT WITH PEERS

Frequency of Attendance

Diocesan

Meetings

(N = 821)

Inter-Diocesan

Meetings

(N = 752)

Meetings

Between

Parishes

(N =787)

Never 23% 40% 25%

Once a Week 2% 1% 6%

Every 2 Weeks 1% 1% 5%

Once a Month 10% 6% 21%

Every 2 Months 16% 8% 19%

Once a Semester 24% 18% 14%

Once a Year 24% 26% 10%

100% 100% 100%

21



Questions Raised by the Data On

Undergraduate & Gradute Degree Persons

Workshops; Contact with Peers

The College Degree

Since 32% of the DREs who are lay persons do not have a
college degree, certain questions might be raised as to:

• whether diocesan offices and parishes have identified these

persons as a separate entity;

• whether a more in-depth profile should be constructed to find

out how non-degree persons become DREs and how well they

function by comparison with those with degrees;

• whether the needs of non-degree DREs differ from those with

degrees.

The DRE with a Masters?

Table 2 shows that 66% of the DREs who are lay persons

and 32% who are sisters do not have Master’s Degrees. It might

be asked where on the list of parish and diocesan priorities

desire for a DRE with an MA or MRE ranks. Are academic creden-

dials valued as a primary means for engendering quality? Are

parishes seeking out and encouraging degree DREs; or, as one

interview suggested, is there a movement toward preferring local

non-degree talent because it is “cheaper,” “less threatening,”

and “more convenient?” Or is it the simple fact that degree DREs

are scarce?

In light of the fact that workshops are the chief vehicle for

providing continuing education to DREs, questions of a more

technical nature were addressed to this area by a specialist in

designing continung educaton programs: He asked:

• “Do workshops rely on the traditional lecture and dialogue

model, or do they, where possible, endeavor to employ

processes which cause the DRE to utilize actual field ex-

perience?”

• “Are workshops ‘one-shot’ experiences, or are they logically

sequenced in order to cause a more continuous and con-

centrated learning experience?”

The underlying concern of these questions is that continuing

education be experienced as formation, rather than as schooling

where the main emphasis is on cognitive input.

22



Learning From Each Other

More often than not, dioceses and parishes have rich internal

resources. In order to capitalize on these, opportunities for shar-

ing must be provided and utilized in the interests of cross-fertili-

zation. Since 23% of the DREs never attend diocesan meetings,

and 25% never attend meetings between parishes, certain ques-
tions about non-attendance are in order:

• To what extent are DRE meetings actually an opportunity for

sharing resources? Is the emphasis in these meetings on

social contact, or are they consciously structured to encour-

age learning experiences? Are they evaluated to determine

the purpose or purposes they serve?

• Do those who never attend DRE meetings do so because:

• none is offered?

• distance is a factor?

• meetings in the past gave no satisfaction?

• there is no feeling of shared responsibility?

23



THE DRE AS EMPLOYEE

Salary, Range of Tasks, Weekly Hours, Role Description,

Longevity on Job, Number of Parishes Served at Once,

Priorities, Co-coordinators

Some DREs may object to the implications of being called

employees. An employee is usually under an employer and sells

his or her services for a price. The general impression in inter-

views with DREs is that their services are given out of a desire

to serve rather than sold, and they function as a part of the com-

munity, not under a particular person. Devotedness and commun-

ity spirit are of critical importance to the success of catechesis.

Devotedness and community spirit, however, need structure to

succeed. By viewing the DRE as an employee, it is possible to

make more concrete and measure many of the human structures

intertwined with and essential to the spiritual variables of devoted

ness and community spirit. In the responses that follow, the

Inventory is concerned with those elements which describe the

working condition of the DRE.

Fifty-one percent of the DREs report they receive a salary.

Nationally, the monthly salary averages approximately $270.

Figure 16 shows that 80% of the salaried DREs receive $500 or

less per month.

Figure 17 depicts the vocational status of salaried and un-

salaried DREs. As is reflected, sisters lead in the category of DREs

who receive a salary.

Table 6 is concerned with salaried DREs only and the rela-

tionship between hours per week they expend and their monthly

income. In the table there is an upward sliding scale which shows

that DREs who work more hours fall into higher wage brackets.

24



47%

FIGURE 16

DISTRIBUTION OF SALARIES FOR PAID DREs

or less

FIGURE 17

VOCATIONAL STATUS OF DRE IN RELATION TO SALARY

85%
(N = 904)

(N = 353) (N = 297) (N = 252) (N = 74)

25



Table 6

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE HOURS PER WEEK A

DRE EXPENDS AND HIS OR HER MONTHLY SALARY

$300 or less

per month $301-600 $601-900 901-1000+

per week (N = 203) (N = 169) (N = 49) (N = 34)

1-10 hours 26% 8% 4% 3%

11-20 hours 24% 10% 2% 6%

21-30 hours 14% 13% 2% 0%

31-40 hours 18% 32% 43% 29%

41+ hours 18% 37% 49% 62%

100% 100% 100% 100%

Table 7 indicates that DREs are primarily responsible for

catechetics which take place outside of the Catholic school system.

It likewise indicates that most of the DREs are involved in direct-

ing or coordinating grades 1 through 8, and that two-thirds are

also responsible for grades 9 through 12. Very few DREs have

responsibility for catechetics within the Catholic school system.

Table 7

PERCENTAGE OF “YES” RESPONSES TO THE VARIOUS GRADE

LEVELS THAT FALL UNDER THE RESPONSIBILITY OF DREs

Grade Levels Not Within

Catholic School System “Yes” Replies

Grade Levels Within

Catholic School System “Yes” Replies

(N = 906) IDocnIIz

Pre-School 39% Pre-School 3%

Primary 85% Primary 14%

Intermediate 86% Intermediate 13%

7th & 8th Grade 82% 7th & 8th Grade 14%

9th-12th Grade 65% 9th-12th Grade 6%

Table 8 shows that the DREs responding to the Inventory

also are responsible for other ministries besides those involved

with school-oriented catechetics. Sacramental preparation ranks

first, adult education second, and family ministry a distant third

among the additional ministries undertaken by DREs.

26



Table 8

PERCENTAGE OF “YES” RESPONSES TO

ADDITIONAL MINISTRIES DREs UNDERTAKE

Additional Ministries

Sacramental Preparation

Adult Education

Family Ministry

“Yes” Replies

64%

46%

22%

When salaried DREs were compared to volunteer DREs it was

found that, in addition to having first grade through to fourth year

high school under their responsiblity, salaried DREs significantly

outnumbered volunteers when it came to having additional re-

sponsibility for adult education, family ministry and sacramental

preparation.

The national average of time spent planning and administer-

ing parish catechetical programs is 22 hours per week. Figure 18

reflects the distribution of hours per week that DREs expend in

planning and directing catechetical programs.

FIGURE 18

DISTRIBUTION OF HOURS PER WEEK DREs EXPEND

44%
(N = 854)

Between: 1-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-60 61 + hrs.

hrs. hrs. hrs. hrs. hrs. hrs. per week

Fifty one percent of the DREs report having a role descrip-

tion. Figure 19 shows sisters are most likely to have a role de-

scription, priests least.

27



FIGURE 19

VOCATIONAL STATUS OF DREs

REPORTING A ROLE DESCRIPTION

66%

To the question, “Do you direct catechetical programs in

more than one parish at the same time?” 87% of the DREs replied

they serve only one parish. Of the 13% who said they serve more

than one parish, 70% serve two parishes, 20% serve three par-

ishes, and 10% serve four or more parishes.

Table 9 reflects how long DREs have served in the parish

in which they are employed.

Table 9

DRE YEARS IN PRESENT PARISH

Years Percentage of DREs

1 28% (N = 246)

2 18% (N = 165)

3 15% (N = 133)

4 10% 00COIIz

5 8% (N = 75)

6+ 21% (N = 188)

100%

28



Figure 20 compares the percentage of lay persons, sisters

and priests with the number of years they have served in the

present parish in which they are employed as DRE.

FIGURE 20

VOCATIONAL STATUS OF DRE AND NUMBER OF YEARS IN THE SAME PARISH

38%

Among the tasks which consume the most time of a DRE,

planning curricula and programs ranked first. Teaching religion,

providing materials, and coordinating in-service teacher train-

ing ranked equally close for the second most time-consuming task.

Thirty nine percent of the DREs report they have co-directors

in coordinating parish catechetcal programs. The following list of

titles are given to the co-workers who team up with the DRE:

• Co-coordinator

• Coordinator of Primary

/

Secondary Grades

• Coordinator/ Director

of Adult Education

• Spiritual Director

• Coordinator/ Director

of Youth Programs

• Coordinator/ Director

of Liturgy

When the 39% of the DREs who said they had a co-coordi-
nator were compared in relation to vocational status, priests,

sisters, and lay persons were found to be equally likely to have

such a collaborator. Whether there is a Catholic school or not has

no influence on the presence of an additional co-coordinator.

29



Table 10 shows that more hours per week are expended on

planning and coordinating catechetical programs by DREs who

report they have a role description than by those who report hav-

ing none.

Table 10

THE COMPARISON OF DREs WITH AND WITHOUT A ROLE

DESCRIPTION AND HOURS PER WEEK EXPENDED

DREs Who Have DREs Who Have No

Hours Per Week Role Description Role Description

(N = 437) (N = 404)
1-10 hours 25% 66%

11-20 hours 15% 14%

21-30 hours 9% 6%

31-40hours 22% 7%

41+ hours 29% 7%

100% 100%

Table 11 compares the location of a parish to the number of

hours per week DREs report giving to a parish. As the table shows,

rural parish catechetical programs receive the least amount of

time from a DRE, whereas suburban parishes located next to a

city receive the most time.

Table 11

LOCATION AND TIME INPUT OF DRE

Major City

Over Major

Suburb

Next to

Small City

Under Rural

1
,
000,000 City City 50,000 Town

(N = 58) (N = 132) (N = 155) (N = 272) (N = 226)

1-20 Hours 53% 53% 36% 55% 85%

21+ Hours 47% 47% 64% 45% 15%

100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Questions Raised by the Data On

Salary, Range of Tasks, Weekly Hours & Role Description

During one interview a full-time youth minister, having heard

the statistics on salary and role description, made the following

comments. “I am thirty-six years old, married, and have a family.
When I took on this work my father was very opposed to it. He

asked me to think for a minute about the future. ‘When you are

30



forty,' he said, ‘and perhaps don't want youth ministry any more,

where do you go within your profession for an alternative? And

further more, what retirement and health benefits will you have?'
"

The youth minister concluded by saying he loved his work

and would continue in it, but he often wonders where youth

ministry will lead him and his family in the future.

In interview after interview the question of the uncertain

future for a DRE was raised. The data show that many parishes

still have not defined their position or given them, at the least,

the minimum wage scale. If the responsibility for administering

parish catechetical programs will increasingly rest with lay per-

sonnel, then, as was asked in many of the interviews:

• What type of financial programs are being designed to at-

tract married as well as single professionals? If financial

programs do exist, are they short- or long-range in vision?

Do they reduce the risk of having to start from scratch

should a DRE decide to leave the parish?

• Equally important is the overall question of role description.

Role descriptions establish expectations, set limits and free

a person of frustration. Do dioceses and parishes give estab-

lishment of role descriptions number one priority? Once role

descriptions are establshed, is there a feedback system set

up by the parish and diocese to assess whether the original

role descriptions need further refining? Is establishing role

descriptions seen as an ongoing task?

Are We Wasting Valuable Personnel?

The burned-out syndrome was a recurring subject for dis-

cussion in interviews. In places where a salaried DRE is putting in

40 or more hours a week and is in charge of a large parish pro-

gram, the question of being a “jack-of-all-trades” was raised. If,

as is reported, a high percentage of DREs have a range of respon-

sibilities extending from adult education through high school

down to first grade with pre-school education and sacramental

preparation thrown in for good measure, a team approach would

seem to be essential. In efforts to build a corps of resilient DREs

for the future it must be asked:

• Whether parish and diocesan policies are designed to en-

courage a team approach at the executive level of parish

catechetical programs?

• Whether periodic workshops should address themselves to

the importance of the utilization of time, and whether par-

31



ishes actually do assess the time line of the DRE? Is there a

balance that allows for breathing space?

Are the Catechetical Needs of the Rural Areas Being Neglected?

One priest, in responding to the National Inventory inserted a

letter in his returned questionnaire. He said his rural parish is

served only by himself and he must cover as much as a hundred

miles a day to serve his parishioners. The parishioners are of a

low educational background and lack the ability to run cate-

chetical programs. The priest concluded he was doing his best

and added that the questionnaire was totally unrealistic for his

area.

A heavy percentage of those DREs reporting 20 or less hours

come from small country parishes. We would call many of these

parishes, "missions.” In the past there were organizations and

religious who specialized in catechizing in these areas. Now, their

ranks are thinning and not being replenished. It must be asked

whether a renewed thrust is needed which puts strong emphasis

on utilizing lay personnel. How do we attract them to this aposto-

late and, once they are attracted, what type of formation will prove

most valuable to them?

When Does a DRE Move On?

When Figure 20 was reviewed it was noticed that there was

a rise in the number of DREs who report being in the same parish

six or more years. This raises the question whether dioceses and

parishes should strive to keep DREs in one parish indefinitely or

whether there should be a policy of encouraging moves after a

determined length of time in the same parish. When does desir-

able stability turn into entrenchment and inertia? When does the

quest for change lead to turmoil and uncertainty?

32



PART II

CATECHETICAL MINISTRIES

Family Ministry and Adult Education

Ministry to the Handicapped

The Ministry of Formal Education

Youth Ministry

With the identity of the DRE established
and the various

administrative dimensions of his or
her position defined, the

Inventory shifts its focus. In this
section the concern is with the

existence of catechetcal ministries
which respond to the many

needs of a parish. The Inventory asks
whether the adults of the

parish have the opportunity to experience
programs relevant to

their religious needs. It also asks
whether, within the parish or

its surroundings, the handicapped
receive services suited to their

needs. Finally, it focuses on the
catechesis of the young and

measures the range of educational and
formational experiences

available to them.

When parishes were asked what percentage of the
parishion-

ers participated in adult education and
family ministry programs,

approximately two-thirds said they had a 1% to 10% attendance

each year. See Table 12.

Table 12

YEARLY AVERAGE OF ADULTS WHO ATTEND ADULT EDUCATION

AND FAMILY MINISTRY PROGRAMS

1-10%

Attend

11-20%

Attend

21-30%

Attend

31-50%

Attend 51+%

Parishes having

Adult Education 63% 16% 8% 7% 5% = 100%

Parishes having

Family Ministry 66% 13% 6% 7% 7% = 100%

33



Table 13 depicts the various programs that comprise family

ministry and how frequently they are employed by parishes across

the country. With the exception of parish marriage preparation the

statistics under the Never column show that those programs

designated part of family ministry have not yet become a signifi-

cant part of the local parish ministry.

Table 13

FREQUENCY OF FAMILY MINISTRY PROGRAMS

Never

Parish Marriage

Preparation 30%

Parenthood

Education 60%

Ministry to

divorced/

separated 74%

Marriage and

Family

Enrichment 55%

Natural

Family Plan 71%

Family Living

and sex

education 73%

Once or

more a

month

Once

every 2

months

Once

every 6

months

33% 11% 17%

15% 6% 8%

13% 3% 3%

17% 7% 10%

9% 3% 6%

7% 3% 6%

Once a

year N

8% = 100% (N = 711)

11% = 100% (N = 726)

6% = 100% (N — 681)

10% = 100% (N = 698)

10% = 100% (N = 676)

11% = 100% (N =650)

When the various adult education programs are compared,

Table 14 shows that monthly prayer groups are most frequently

offered, closely followed by discussion groups and catechumenate

and post-baptismal catechesis. Least seldom offered are programs

for singles, followed a considerable distance down the scale by

programs in leadership skills and programs for senior citizens.

See Table 14.

34



Table 14

FREQUENCY OF ADULT EDUCATION PROGRAMS

Never

Once or

more a

month

Once

every 2

months

Once

every 6

months

Once a

year N

Discussion

groups 28% 43% 9% 12% 7% = 100% (N = 913)

Lecture series 32% 24% 8% 20% 16% = 100% (N = 843)

Leadership

skills 56% 14% 5% 11% 13% = 100% (N = 816)

Retreats/

missions 31% 4% 2% 14% 48% = 100% (N = 829)

Catechumenate

and post

Baptismal

catechesis 34% 37% 10% 9% 9% — 100% (N = 848)

Programs for

senior

citizens 54% 27% 4% 7% 7% = 100% (N = 825)

Prayer groups 35% 52% 6% 4% 2% = 100% (N = 877)

Programs for

Singles 81% 11% 2% 2% 3% = 100% (N = 687)

In studying the status of ministry to the handicapped, the

Inventory in Table 15 is first interested in knowing where a person

who is handicapped is able to participate in specal education

programs not of a catechetcal nature. As is shown in the Table

under the column None
,
almost one-half of the DREs reported that

pre-school children who are handicapped have no programs in the

area of their parish that can assist them. One third reported that

young and middle aged adults also have no such programs.

Table 15

SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS WITHIN THE AREA

OF THE PARISH

Special Education Public Private Other than Pri.

Programs

Pre-school

Developmentally

None Parish Inst. Inst. or Pub. Inst. N

Delayed 49% 8% 26% 8% 9% = 100% (N = 891)

School age 25% 18% 37% 10% 10% = 100% (N = 942)

Young Adult to

Midlife 38% 13% 30% 10% 10% = 100% (N = 901)

Elderly

Handicapped 25% 8% 40%

35

10% 16% = 100% (N = 838)



The battery of “yes" responses in Table 16 reflect whether

parishes across the country are providing special help in cate-

chetics for the handicapped.

Table 16

CATECHETICAL ASSISTANCE FOR HANDICAPPED

Percentage of

Parishes saying "Yes” N

Slow learner or

mentally handicapped 43% (N = 868)

Learning disabilities

Emotional disturbed or

socially maladjusted

Blind or

partially seeing

Deaf or hard of

hearing

42% (N = 965)

27% (N = 873)

14% (N = 861)

14% (N = 840)

The third area of concern is with the parish’s effort to pro-

vide special liturgies and aids for those with sensory handicaps.

Also assessed is whether parishes have made provisions to elimi-

nate architectural barriers for those with physical handicaps. As is

reflected in Table 17, most individual parishes do not provide

liturgies or special aids, and better than 50% have not taken into

consideration physical barriers.

Table 17

CONSIDERATIONS FOR HANDICAPPED

Percentage of

Parishes saying "Yes”

Liturgy for Handicapped 11%

Elimination of Physical

Barriers 44%

Special Aids 21%

N

(N = 833)

(N =835)

(N = 823)

As for how many classes in catechetics are offered to the

young people of the parish annually, Table 18 shows that more

formal classes of religion are offered at the primary level than on

the secondary level.

36



Table 18

CLASSES PER YEAR

Between 21-30 31 +
1-20 classes classes classes

Pre-school 23% 51% 26% = 100%

Grades 1-8 15% 60% 25% = 100%

9th grade 43% 43% 14% = 100%

10th grade 44% 41% 15% = 100%

11th grade 48% 38% 14% = 100%

12th grade 50% 38% 12%
— 100%

When asked where religion classes are held, Table 19 re-

flects that the Catholic school is utilized most on the primary level,

with the parish center most employed on the secondary level.

Table 19

LOCATION OF CLASSES

Parish Catholic Public

Hall School School Rectory Sacristy Home Convent

Pre-school 33% 55% 2% 4% 1% 3% 1% = 100%

Grades 1-8 32% 57% 3% 2% 1% 3% 1% = 100%

9th grade 43% 36% 2% 6% 1% 9% 2% = 100%

10th grade 42% 38% 1% 7% 2% 9% 1% = 100%

11th grade 44% 35% 1% 7% 1% 9% 2% = 100%

12th grade 45% 35% 1% 7% 0% 10% 1% — 100%

At the primary level, 83% of the parishes report that the
length of the average class is one hour, 10% two hours and 6%
over two hours.

Three tables were constructed to assess the extent to which

youth ministry on the secondary level is found in parishes. The

tables correspond to categories in a 1976 document by the De-

partment of Education, USCC, entitled “The Vision of Youth

Ministry,” which sees the parish providing services for youth, and

to youth, while likewise receiving services provided by youth.

In Table 20, it is found that individual parishes rank highest

in the Frequently and Very Frequently columns in providing the

opportunity for organized sports and the use of a youth parish

center. Providing job opportunities for disadvantaged youth, op-

portunities for camping, and leadership training rank lowest.

37



Table 20

SERVICES BY PARISH FOR YOUTH

Never

Guidance

counseling 30%

Organized

sports 42%

Leadership

training 45%

Parish Youth

Center 48%

Camping

opportunities 62%

Job opportuni-

ties for

disadvantaged 68%

Very

little Moderately Frequently

22% 22% 11%

12% 11% 10%

26% 12% 7%

11% 10% 10%

15% 9% 4%

17% 5% 3%

Very

Frequently N

15% = 100% (N = 840)

24% = 100% (N =910)

9% = 100% (N = 893)

20% = 100% (N = 876)

9% = 100% (N = 888)

6% = 100% (N = 884)

Table 21 shows in the Never column that approximately one-

third of the parishes never offer youth para-liturgies, prayer serv-

ices, or retreats. Almost one-fourth never offer special eucharistic

celebrations or penance services for youth. Scripture study groups

rank lowest of all as a parish service to young people. On the

other hand, Table 21 shows that 60% of the parishes offer youth
retreats once every six months or once a year.

Table 21

FREQUENCY OF PARISH SERVICES FOR YOUTH

Never

Once or

more a

month

Once

every 2

months

Once

every 6

months

Once a

year N

Eucharistic

celebration 23% 33% 10% 22% 12% = 100% (N = 890)

Para liturgical

celebration 32% 19% 16% 23% 9% = 100% (N = 752)

Prayer service 42% 28% 10% 13% 7% = 100% (N = 782)

Scripture

study group 76% 18% 1% 3% 2% = 100% (N = 864)

Penance

service 23% 11% 8% 39% 19% = 100% (N = 841)

Retreats 34% 2% 3% 14% 46% = 100% (N = 805)

38



Table 22 reflects in the Frequently and Very Frequently col-

umns that youth are most involved as catechetical aides and in

providing music for liturgies. A large number of parishes also re-

port that young people are frequently involved as catechists and

are a part of the parish council.

Table 22

YOUTH SERVICES IN THE PARISH

Very Fre- Very

Never little Moderately quently Frequently N

Parish Council 46% 10% 9% 7% 27% = 100% (N = 856)

Catechists 25% 23% 16% 11% 24% = 100% (N = 863)

Catechist aide 16% 22% 18% 15% 29% = 100% (N = 885)

Community

services 25% 26% 22% 13% 13% = 100% (N = 870)

Action for

justice 58% 21% 8% 3% 10% = 100% (N = 885)

Musicians for

liturgy 15% 26% 15% 13% 30% = 100% (N = 945)

Extraordinary

ministers for

Eucharist 74% 2% 6% 4% 9% = 100% (N = 875)

Questions Raised By the Data On

Family Ministry and Adult Education,

Ministry to the Handcapped,

Youth Ministry

Where Does the DRE Fit In With All These Ministries?

In conversations with DREs a topic that constantly arose

was the proliferation of ministries. As one DRE remarks, “We

now have family and youth ministry, the permanent diaconate,

ministries to the dying, the sick, aged, etc. We are beginning to

overlap and become confused about who is supposed to do what.”

Another DRE said that when she first heard of youth ministry

and what it involved, she was actually frightened by it. Most

frightening to her was the thought that social contact was being

emphasized at the expense of learning one’s religion. Not until

she herself experienced some of the working principles of youth

ministry did she realize its goals and potential.

39



In light of these conversations certain basic questions must

be raised.

• When a comparatively new ministry is generated, do dioceses

and parishes pull together those who will be responsible for

its success or failure and find out how the ministry is per-

ceived? What perception do DREs have when they hear of

ministries such as family or youth ministry? As was discussed

in an earler secton of this report, are DREs clear about their

role and expectations?

• Is an effort made on the diocesan level to contextualize a

new ministry? Are DREs made aware of the historical back-

ground: when the ministry started: how it was started; and

by whom? Is an effort made to see how a new ministry differs

from others; what new needs it meets; what hope it en-

genders? Before educating the grassroots level, do DREs

have a firm grasp of the ministry? In addition to reading and

hearing about a ministry, are there opportunities to experi-

ence it?

Where Does Family Ministry Exist?

A director of family ministry was asked in an interview what

he thought about the very low percentage of parishes reporting

that they had family ministry. He was very quick to point out that,

even though ministering to the family is as old as the history of

man, recognizing it as having its own unique identity is recent.

He also pointed out that it is only within the last few years that

divorced or separated persons have been even considered as

persons who need the services of ministry.

He then went on to state that family ministry at the moment

exists more on the diocesan level and that the statistics were

actually encouraging since they indicate that it is beginning to

sift down into the parishes.

When one reviews recent studies such as those by Urie

Bronfenbrenner or reads the recent Carnegie study All Our Chil-

dren and the National Catechetical Directory
,
no doubt is left

about the need for family ministry. Personnel must be found and

materials produced that respond to the need. In light of the fact,

however, that approximately one-half of the nation’s parishes will

not or cannot budget a salary for DREs and that, after almost 10

years, half of the nation’s DREs report they have no role descrip-

tion, many questions are raised about the future survival of family

ministry.

40



• Is family ministry envisioned as an ad hoc function respond-

ing to a momentary surge in family awareness? Or does it see

itself as a ministry which must establsh recognition, budgets,

and a clear definition of how it distinctly differs from other

ministries?

• Should family ministry have its own separate identity or be

part of the catechetical program? What are the advantages of

separate identity; of being a part of the catechetical program?

• Since the constituency of family ministry flows into every

other ministerial constituency, are provisions being made so

that excessive demands are not made on the time of these

constituencies?

I Could Have Told You That

When the data on adult education were reviewed by one

diocesan director of catechetics, his reaction to the statistic that

81% of the nation’s parishes have no programs for singles was,

“You didn’t need a survey to find that out. I could have told you

that. Any DRE knows it.”

In several interviews with persons who are single it was

common to hear them express the feeling that they are always

“left out.”

With the number of single persons growing, it might be

asked whether parish DREs have made a special effort to identify

them. In appealing for co-workers in catechetics has the single

person been considered a rich resource?

The Forgotten Malady That Most Do Not Want To Remember

It is usually not until we personally experience a physical or

emotional handicap that we realize the number of other persons

who have lived their lives with a handicap.

In light of the statistics showing that many parishes report

they do not have services for the handicapped, it must be asked

whether these persons are ever considered on a catechetical

agenda. Is there an awareness of who in the parish is handi-

capped? If the parish itself is not equipped to help the handi-

capped, is a referral system available?

Are We Making Contact With Our Young?

When the three tables on youth ministry were reviewed, a

41



new insight arose on how to interpret the first table. Table 20,

entitled Services By Parish For Youth

,

was seen as probing the

pre-evangelization stage that leads to catechesis. Put another way,

the questions are asking whether parishes are taking advantage

of certain contact opportunities with youth. Several other inter-

esting questions arise out of this question.

• How do parishes perceive their catechetical contact with

youth? Is that contact primarily to be made at parish liturgies

and/or in a catechetical context?

• If, as the statistics in Table 20 reflect, parishes are not

offering contact points outside a catechetical setting, is it

because they do not see this as a pre-evangelization stage

to catechesis? Or, as one interviewee suggested, is it that

just as counselling and guidance should be given to youth

to help them adjust, so, too, adults working with youth need

assistance in order to overcome their natural fears about

dealing with youth?

• Do parishes that serve youth treat ministry for youth, to

youth, and by youth not as three separate entities, but rather

as one composite to catechize youth?

42



PART III

THE SUPPORT SYSTEMS OF

PARISH CATECHETICAL PROGRAMS

Parent and Priest Participation

Support on the Elementary Level

Evaluation of Youth Ministry

Support from Colleges

Parish Libraries

Certification Programs

Diocesan and Catholic School Support

The final division of the Inventory is concerned with the

personal, structural, and financial supports which enable parish

catechetical programs to operate more efficiently and effectively.

The questions in this section examine the amount of participant

involvement in catechetical programs on the part of the parents

and the priests of the parish. Also surveyed are the spiritual and

educational resources available to those who staff a program.

Finally, the budgets upon which programs depend are reviewed.

Table 23 reflects that programs for eucharistic preparation

tend to have the highest percentage of parent participation.

Parents seem to become less involved as their children become

older and receive additional sacraments.

43



Table 23

PARENT PARTICIPATION IN SACRAMENTAL PREPARATION

Percentage of

Parents 0%

Participating: Participate 1-20% 21-50% 51-75% 76-100% N

Parishes

Reporting

Preparation For:

the sacrament

of Eucharist 29% 7% 9% 12% 43% = 100% (N = 876)

the sacrament

of Recon-

ciliation 36% 6% 11% 12% 35% = 100% (N = 889)

the sacrament

of Confirmation 42% 8% 8% 9% 33% = 100% (N = 913)

Under the Frequently to Very Frequently columns, Table 24

shows that better than half the priests in the country are reported

to be frequently involved with activities that support parish cate-

chetical programs. Looking at the Never and Very Little columns

of the table, one sees that between a fourth or a third of the

priests never or almost never are part of certain basic catechetical

functions.

Table 24

PRIEST'S INVOLVEMENT IN CATECHETICAL FUNCTIONS

Never Very Little

Mod-

erate Frequently

Very

Frequently N

Help in Adult

Ed. 8% 16% 18% 20% 37% = 100% (N = 938)

Help in Family

Ed. 14% 17% 25% 12% 31% = 100% (N = 894)

Student

Liturgies 9% 21% 17% 16% 36% = 100% (N = 877)

Teach Religion 23% 14% 11% 9% 43% = 100% (N = 977)

Visit Classes 8% 17% 17% 13% 45% = 100% (N = 957)

Participate in

Social Events

Related to

prog. 12% 14% 16% 17% 41% = 100% (N = 976)

Help teachers

with teaching 16% 17% 20% 20% 26% = 100% (N = 959)

Help in proj-

ects that per-

tain to

catechetics 15% 13% 16% 22% 33% = 100% (N = 979)

44



Table 25 reviews services that create a bond of collaboration

and provide spiritual reinforcement for teachers and parents

working on the primary level. The table reflects that parent-

teacher meetings followed by spiritual days of renewal for teachers

and students are not present in more than a third of parish cate-

chetical programs. On the other hand, the table shows that over

50% of the parishes report that their teaching staffs meet month-

ly to evaluate their teaching progress, and more than one-fourth

of the parishes have in-service training on a monthly basis.

Table 25

COMPLEMENTARY SERVICES TO CATECHETICAL PROGRAMS

ON THE PRIMARY LEVEL

Never

Once

or more

a month

Once

every 2

months

Once

every 6

months

Once a

Year N

How often does

teaching staff

meet to evalu-

ate teaching? 5% 58% 18% 15% 4% = 100% (N = 999)

. . is in-service

training held? 16% 28% 13% 27% 16% = 100% (N = 925)

. . are parent-

teacher meet-

ings held? 42% 6% 5% 27% 19% = 100% (N = 963)

. . are days of

spiritual re-

newal for

students? 37% 10% 3% 19% 30% = 100% (N = 952)

. . are days of

spiritual re-

newal for

teachers? 35% 3% 3% 23% 35% = 100% (N = 831)

. . do catechists

get together to

socialize? 14% 15% 8% 30% 24% = 100% (N = 870)

On the elementary level almost two-fifths of the parishes
report employing teachers who presently are not certified by the
diocese. See Table 26.

45



Table 26

PERCENTAGE OF CERTIFIED TEACHERS ON THE PRIMARY LEVEL

0% teachers

are certified

1-20%

certified

21-50%

certified

51-75%

certified

76-100%

certified

Percentage of

Parishes 39% 30% 16% 7% 7% = 100%

In youth ministry it is found that only 16% of the parish

catechetical programs evaluate this particular form of ministry.

Table 27 shows that almost two-thirds of the parishes do not

have a college or university nearby providing catechetical courses.

The table also shows that better than half of the parishes have

no parish library. In the same table, four-fifths of the parishes

report having a certification program for their catechists within

the area of the parish.

Table 27

CATECHETICAL SUPPORT FROM HIGHER EDUCATION, PARISH

LIBRARIES & CERTIFICATION PROGRAMS

Yes N

Higher Education Support 39% (N = 885)

Parish Library 47% (N = 868)

Certification Programs 80% (N = 895)

With the exception of video equipment, most

programs have educational hardware. See Table 28.

catechetical

Table 28

EDUCATIONAL HARDWARE

Yes N

Slide projectors 88% (N =912)

Movie Projectors 86% (N = 915)

Overhead Projectors 63% (N = 887)

Tape Recorders 88% (N = 889)

Record Players 95% (N = 889)

Video Equipment 9% (N = 886)

46



When DREs were asked, “Is there a catechetical budget for

the parish catechetical program(s)?" 67% of those responding

said they did have a budget. Of the DREs who responded to the

question, “Is there a Catholic School within the parish you serve?”

51% replied “yes."

Table 29 reflects that parishes with a Catholic school do not

differ very significantly from parishes without one when it comes

to budgeting for catechetical programs.

Table 29

THE COMPARISON OF PARISHES WITH OR WITHOUT A CATHOLIC

SCHOOL AND WHETHER THERE IS A CATECHETICAL BUDGET

Have Catholic

School

No Catholic

School

Parish Has

Catechetical Budget 54%

No Catechetical Budget 47%

46% =100% (N = 567)

53% = 100% (N =289)

Table 30 depicts the percentage of parishes with a catechet-

ical budget, by location.

Table 30

THE LOCATION OF PARISHES WHICH HAVE A

PARISH CATECHETICAL BUDGET

Have Catechetical Budget N

Large Major City 60% (N = 57)

Major City 72% (N = 132)

Suburb 69% (N = 157)

Small City 71% (N = 274)

Rural Area 56% (N =221)

Asked to “list and rank the four most important services

that the diocesan office provides for the parish you serve," re-

spondents gave first place—far outranking the other three—to
providing training

,
certification programs, workshops and en-

richment days. Next in the order of ranking were those services

which provide audio visuals, educational materials, and resource

books. Encouragement, counselling, and visits ranked third.

Newsletters, calendar schedules, and lists of current books ranked

fourth.

47



When the DREs reporting that their parishes had Catholic

schools were asked to describe the types of services they receive

from the schools, the most frequently mentioned were co-planned

programs for sacramental preparation, para-liturgies, days of

recollection, and prayer groups.

Questions Raised by the Data On

Priests Participation

Complementary Services to Catechetical Programs

Certification

Budgets

Priests Participation

In interviews with DREs and Diocesan Directors of Catechetics

it was not uncommon to hear them speak about “those” pastors

who give little or no support to catechetical programs. Nor was

it uncommon to hear pastors speak about “those” DREs and

“their” wild ideas. It seems that each side was suspicious of the

other and that there was a wide gulf between them. In light of the

statistic that close to a third of the priests never or almost never

are part of certain basic catechetical functions, one DRE raised

the following question:

• Would it be possible for a diocesan or parish policy to require

that periodically a DRE would spend a day with the parish

priest as he performs his services to the parish? On the

other side of the spectrum, could this same policy apply to

priests, who would be required to spend an equal period of

time with the DRE as he or she provides catechetical

services?

• As the DRE who suggested this idea remarked, “If priests

and DREs experienced each other’s work, it might put a stop

to their second-guessing each other, create more collegiality,

and perhaps involve those priests who feel insecure with the

ever-changing functions of catechetical programs.”

In light of the above suggestions and questions it must be

asked whether dioceses are developing models, similar to the one

mentioned here, that put non-priest DREs into a working relation-

ship with the parish priests. How many diocesan meetings are so
structured—like the marriage encounter, for example—to create
open understanding between persons who need one another but

who might be taking one another for granted?

48



Complementary Services To Catechetical Programs

Given the fact that 42% of the parishes have no teacher-

parent meetings and another 16% have them only once a year for

the primary level, it might be asked whether in-service .training

courses should consider counselling teachers on the merits and

processes of parent-teacher meetings. Studies might be under-

taken to determine whether increasing parent-teacher relation-

ships have an influence on student discipline, tardiness, and

absenteeism.

In light of Table 25, which shows a high percentage of parishes

that never have days of spiritual renewal for teachers or students,

it must be asked whether diocesan offices make a conscious effort

to establish a satisfactory balance between the educational and

spiritual aspects of catechetics. Diocesan offices might also re-

search whether there is a correlation between faculty stability,

satisfaction, and the amount of spiritual support faculty and staff

receive.

Certification

When certification of catechists was discussed with DREs,

several basic questions were raised:

• Do diocesan offices build into these programs feed-back sys-

tems which monitor what types of persons attend, the dis-

tances they travel, their satisfaction with the content and

process, and the reason for attending?

• Are provisions made to overcome travel inconveniences, solve

babysitting problems, and avoid overtaxing the time of those

who attend?

• Are various levels of achievement built into the programs of

certification, so that a teacher attending has a feeling of

making continuous progress?

• Are dioceses looking into the possibility of putting certifica-

tion programs on videotapes and using this medium as a

possible means of overcoming problems of travel and time

involved in taking courses for certification?

The Old Problem of Money

With exactly one-third of the parishes of the nation reporting

they have no budget for catechetical programs, it must be asked:

• Whether this is a reflection of an attitude of neglect, or

49



whether these parishes have so designed their programs that

they are self-sustaining and need no parish budgets?

• Whether dioceses have identified the various budget models

that are utilized to sustain a parish catechetical program?

• Whether diocesan offices help parishes design budgets and,

in the process, use this time as an opportunity also to edu-

cate a parish DRE to the close relationship between budget-

ing, programming, and planning.

• Whether budgeting is considered to involve not just a right to

funds but also an obligation to make better use of resources

already available?

50



SUMMARY

In summary we shall consider questions that pertain to the

identity of the DRE, the catechetical ministries within the parish

he or she serves, and the support systems that enable DREs and

catechetical ministries to operate.

THE DRE

1. Directors and coordinators of parish catechetical programs

that are not within the Catholic schools

Three major groups of DREs emerge. They are lay persons,

sisters and priests. Lay persons outnumber sisters and priests as

the predominant group responsible for catechetics in the parish,

with a 35% representation. Sisters are the next highest group,

with 29%, and priests follow, with a 28% representation. Reli-

gious brothers make up 7%, while permanent deacons and sem-

inarians both have a 0.5% representation.

The predominant racial and ethnic background of the DRE is

white-Caucasian-American. Hispanics, Blacks, Native Americans,

and Orientals combined represent only 15% of the DRE popula-

tion.

2. The educational background of the DRE

Forty-eight percent of the DREs who are lay persons have a

college degree, whereas 91% of the sisters and 97% of the
priests report having completed four years of college. The pre-

dominant major for undergraduate degrees is in liberal arts.

Thirty-four percent of the lay DREs, 68% of the sisters, and
51% of the priests have graduate degrees. The predominant grad-
uate degree is a master of arts or science.

Workshops far outnumber undergraduate or graduate courses

as the means for updating the education of a DRE in the last two

years.

51



Better than 50% of the DREs report reading religious educa-

tion and theological articles on a frequent or very frequent basis.

3. Responsibilities of a DRE

Over four-fifths of the DREs say they are responsible for coor-

dinating grades 1 through 8. Two-thirds also report they are

responsible for grades 9 through 12. A very small percentage

report they have responsibility for catechetics within the Catholic

school system.

c

In addition to coordinating catechetics on the primary and

secondary level, 64% of the DREs say they coordinate sacra-

mental preparation programs, 46% coordinate adult education,

and 22% are responsible for family ministry.

When DREs were asked whether they direct catechetical pro-

grams in more than one parish at the same time, only 13% replied

they did.

Forty-four percent of the DREs report they expend 1 to 10

hours each week preparing and planning catechetical programs.

Another 22% say they spend between 11 and 30 hours, 15%

spend between 31 and 40 hours, and 19% work at this more than

41 hours per week.

When asked whether there was a job description for their

position, 51% of the DREs said yes.

Planning curricula and catechetical programs are ranked as

the most time-consuming tasks a DRE undertakes. Teaching reli-

gion, providing catechetical materials, and coordinating in-service

training ranked equally as the second most time-consuming task.

Thirty-nine percent of the DREs report they have another co-

ordinator or director who helps them in administering catechetical

programs.

4. Years in the same parish

More than half of the DREs say they have been in the same

parish for three or more years. It should be noted, however, that

those who report being in a parish six or more years tend to be

priests who have taken on the role of DRE.

5. Salary

Fifty-one percent of the DREs report they receive a salary.

Eighty percent of these DREs earn $500 or less per month.

52



Another 13% earn between $501 and $990, and 7% earn a
monthly salary of $991 or more.

Sisters are predominant among DREs receiving a salary.

CATECHETICAL MINISTRIES

1. Family Ministry

It would seem that family ministry has not yet sifted down to

the parish level. Almost three-fourths of the parishes never have

programs which address the needs of the divorced or separated;

natural family planning or family living and sex education. Better

than 55% of the parishes likewise report never having parenthood

education or marriage and family enrichment programs. Marriage

preparation is the only family ministry offered somewhat fre-

quently on the parish level.

2. Adult Education

Over 50% of the parishes report they have prayer groups

which meet once or more a month. Approximately one-half of the

parishes offer discussion groups and catechumenate and post-

baptismal catechumenate once every two months or more often.

Eighty-one percent of the parishes report they never have pro-

grams for singles.

3. Handicapped persons

Better than two-fifths of the parishes say they provide special

help for slow learners or the mentally handicapped and to per-

sons with learning disabilities.

Approximately a fourth of the parishes also provide services to

the emotionally disturbed or socially maladjusted.

Only 14% of the parishes say they provide help for the blind
and deaf.

Special liturgies are provided by little more than one-tenth of

the parishes. Approximately one-fifth of the parishes provide spe-

cial aids, and better than two-fifths have made some effort to elim-

inate physical barriers to the handicapped.

4. Number of catechetical classes each school year

On the primary level, 15% of the parishes say they have
between 1 and 20 classes a year. Another 60% say they provide

53



between 21 and 30 classes, and the remaining 25% of the par-

ishes report they conduct more than 31 classes per year.

The number of classes offered for youth drops considerably

at the secondary level. Only between 12% and 15% of the par-

ishes report they offer more than 31 classes a year, whereas an

average of 40% offer between 21 and 30 classes, and another

45% offer between 10 and 20 classes per year.

On the primary level classes are held predominantly in Catho-

lic school classrooms. On the secondary level the parish hall is

most frequently cited as the place where catechetical instruction

is conducted.

5. Youth Ministry

Of those services which are frequently provided for youth, the

opportunity for organized sports ranks first, the use of a youth

center ranks a close second, and counselling is third.

Providing job opportunities for disadvantaged youth, oppor-

tunities for camping, and leadership training are the least fre-

quently offered at the parish level.

Approximately three-fourths of the parishes report never hav-

ing scripture study groups. One-third of the parishes never have

para-liturgies or retreats, and one-fourth never have eucharistic

celebrations or penance services.

The parishes that offer retreats to youth most frequently have

them only once a year. When penance services are offered, they

are typically conducted once every semester, whereas eucharistic

celebrations, para-liturgies, and prayer services tend to be cele-

brated on a monthly basis.

When the various services that youth provide for the parish

are compared, it is found that on a frequent to very frequent

basis youth are most involved in being catechetical aids to cate-

chists and in providing music for parish liturgies. Better than

one-third of the parishes also report that youth serve their par-

ishes as catechists and as members of the parish council.

54



SUPPORT FOR CATECHETICAL PROGRAMS

1. Parental involvement in sacramental preparation programs

Programs for eucharistic preparation have the highest per-

centage of parent participation, with 43% of the parishes report-

ing they have from 76% to 100% parental involvement. Another

29% of the parishes report no parental involvement in such a

program.

Parents become less involved in programs that prepare their

children for the sacraments of Reconciliation and Confirmation.

2. Involvement by priests

More than 50% of the priests frequently or very frequently

become involved in adult education, family ministry, student litur-

gies, teaching religion, visiting religion classes, partaking in so-

cial events pertinent to catechetics, helping teachers with their

teaching, and helping to plan catechetical programs.

On the other hand, another third to a fourth of the priests

never or almost never become involved in such functions.

3. Support of teachers on the primary level

Seventy-six percent of the DREs report that once every two

months or more often teaching staffs meet to evaluate their

teaching. Only 5% of the DREs report they never have these eval-
uation sessions.

Better than two-fifths of the parishes say that once every two

months or more often in-service training sessions are conducted.

Sixteen percent of the parishes report they never have such ses-

sions.

Almost half the parishes report they have parent-teacher

meetings once every six months or once a year, whereas two-fifths

55



of the parishes report they never have them.

Better than half of the parishes say there are spiritual renewal

days for teaching staff every six months or once a year. Another

35% say they never have them.

4. Certified teachers

Thirty-nine percent of the parishes report they have no certi-

fied teachers teaching on the primary level. Another 30% of the
parishes say from 1% to 20% of their teachers are certified. Six-
teen percent say 21% to 50% are certified, and 14% report from

51% to 100% certified.

5. Teaching resources

Almost one-half the parishes report they have a parish library,

and better than 30% of them report a certification program within

the location of the parish.

Most parishes supply their catechists with audio-visual teach-

ing aids.

6. Budget

Sixty-seven percent of the parishes say they have a catecheti-

cal budget. The location of the parish and whether it does or does

not have a Catholic school seems to have no effect on whether

there is a budget.

56



CONCLUSION

In his 1964 encyclical Ecclesiam Suam Pope Paul VI, urging

renewal in the Church, wrote:

The Church in this moment must reflect on herself to

find strength in the knowledge of her place in the divine plan;

to find again greater light, new energy and fuller joy in the

fulfillment of her own mission. 4

The Inventory is an effort to generate reflection necessary to

renewal in the field of catechetics. Three categories were con-

structed to help focus reflection on catechetics in this country.

The first category gave a picture of the person and the adminis-

trative functions that compose the office of DRE. The second cate-

gory measured the existence and frequency of the various cate-

chetical ministries in parishes. The last category is composed of

questions which measured support systems that enable catecheti-

cal programs to succeed.

Since the Inventory is the first attempt ever to draw a national

portrait, projections cannot be made at this time. It is hoped the

value of the Inventory will cause deeper reflection on the present

status of catechetics; that the data will encourage those in dio-

cesan offices and parishes to raise further questions pertaining to

their particular situations; and that these same persons will be

inspired to generate additional research, so that a more perfect

understanding of catechetics can be developed and a consequent

renewal achieved.

4 Paths of the Church (Paul VI, 1964): Paths of the Church (Ecclesiam

Suam), Encyclical letter of Pope Paul VI, August 6, 1964.

57





UNITED STATES CATHOLIC CONFERENCE
Department of Education
1312 MASSACHUSETTS AVENUE N.W., WASHINGTON. D.C. 20005 (202) 659-6685

Office of Research, Policy and Program Development

Dear Colleague:

This questionnaire which is entitled "A National Inventory of Parish

Catechetical Programs" has been designed by the Office of Research, Policy

and Program Development of the USCC, and the Boys Town Research Center at

Catholic University in consultation with over 100 diocesan and university/

college religious educators throughout the country.

The purpose of the questionnaire is to inventory the national range

of functions that are involved in parish catechetical programs. Likewise,

its purpose is to draw a profile of the director/coordinator who is

responsible for these functions.

Such information will be very valuable for several reasons:

- It will give a better understanding of the range of responsi-

bilities that a director/coordinator of a parish catechetical

program must shoulder.

- It will surface those functions in catechetical programs that

are predominant and those which receive less attention.

- It will give graduate schools that are responsible for

training directors/coordinators a better understanding on how

to better prepare these persons for their role.

- It will act as an indicator on how the National Catechetical

Directory should be implemented.

- Finally, it will lead to more indepth research and the con-

sequent professionalism that is engendered by it.

Since it is not economical to inventory all 22,466 parishes and

missions, we have taken a random sample of every tenth parish in the U.S.A.

The time and effort you give to respond to this survey is deeply appreciated.

Over a year has gone into preparing this study. If through a

cooperative effort we can study where we are now in catechesis in relation

to where we want to go for the future, I believe such a venture
cannot but

lead to greater fulfillment in the work of catechetics we serve.

Thank you.

Sincerely yours.

(Rev.) Eugene F. Hemrick

Coordinator, Office of Research,

Policy and Program Development

Please return the completed questionnaire to:

Rev. Eugene Hemrick

Office of Research, Policy and

Program Development, USCC

1312 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20005

59



NATIONAL INVENTORY OF PARISH CATECHETICAL PROGRAMS

INSTRUCTIONS

RANGE OF SURVEY

This questionnaire is intended to survey catechetical programs

which are not within the Catholic Parochial School System.

These programs sometimes are called CCD programs.

PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR ANSWERING SURVEY

The questionnaire is to be filled out by the person most

responsible for directing/coordinating parish catechetical

programs which are not within the Catholic Parochial School

Sys tern

.

If your parish has more than one such person please designate

the individual who is involved in the most tasks and decisions

your parish catechetical program demands.

THE MANNER OF RESPONDING

Please check the bracket, circle the number or fill in the

blank space.

60



NATIONAL INVENTORY OF PARISH CATECHETICAL PROGRAMS

OFFICE OF RESEARCH, POLICY AND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

UNITED STATES CATHOLIC CONFERENCE

1312 MASSACHUSETTS AVE. N.W.

WASHINGTON, D C. 20005

THE MANNER OF RESPONDING

PLEASE CHECK THE BRACKET, CIRCLE THE NUMBER OR

FILL IN THE BLANK SPACE IN MAKING YOUR RESPONSE

I. QUESTIONS 1-21 PERTAIN TO THE PROFILE OF THE COORDINATOR/DIRECTOR OF CATECHETICS

1. What is your formal title in regard to catechetics? e.g. coordinator, director, etc.

2. Please indicate your sex:

[ ] Male [ ] Female

3. Your age:

[ ] 21-25 [ ] 41-45

[ ] 26-30 [ ] 46-50

[ ]
31-35

[ ]
51-55

[ ]
36-40

[ ] 56-60 +

4. (PLEASE CHECK ONE OF THE FOLLOWING BRACKETS AND FILL IN THE BLANK)

a. [ ] I receive a salary for services

If you receive a salary please indicate how much you receive

$ for how many months months.

b. [ ] I volunteer services but receive some financial benefits

If you receive financial benefits please indicate how much you receive

$ for how many months months.

c. [ ] I completely volunteer services without any financial benefits

5. Are you :

[ ] A lay person [ ] Permanent Deacon

[ ] Religious Brother [ ] Seminarian

[ ] Religious Sister [ ] Priest

If your are a priest, are you:

[ ] A Pastor

] An Associate Pastor

[ ] An Assistant Pastor

[ ] A Diocesan Priest not

assigned to a particular parish

[ ] A Religious Priest

6. Do you direct catechetical programs in more than one parish at the same time?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

If yes, how many parishes are served at the same time?

[ ] 2 [ ] 4

[ ] 3 [ ] 5 +

61



7.

For how many years have you had the position of coordinator/director

of catechetics in this particular parish ?

[ ] 1 year

[ ] 2 years

[ ] 3 years

[ ] 4 years

[ ] 5 years

[ ] 6 years +

8.

Which of the following religious education divisions do you personally coordinate/

direct?

(CHECK MORE THAN ONE WHERE NECESSARY)

’

] Adult education
’

] Family education
’

] Sacramental preparation for parents
’

] Adolescents (grs. 9-12) CCD Parish Program
’

] Early adolescents (grs. 7-8) CCD

] ] Children (intermediate level )CCD
‘

] Children (primary) CCD

[ ]
Young children (pre-school) CCD

] Adolescents(grs 9-12) Cath. Sch.
’

] Early adol . (grs .7-8 ) Cath. Sch.
’

] Children(intermediate)Cath. Sch.
’

] Children(primary) Cath. Sch.

|
] Young child. (pre-sch) Cath. Sch.

’

] Other catechetical programs

Specify

9.

Have you been a coordinator/director for catechetical programs in parishes

other than the one in which you presently serve?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

If you answered yes to question 9,

a coordinator/director?

in how many other parishes have you been

[]\ ut
[ ] 3 [ ] 6

+

Is there a defined job description for your position?

[ 1 Yes [ ] No

If yes, who was primarily responsible for composing your role description?

(CHECK MORE THAN ONE IF NECESSARY)

[ ] Pastor [ ] Diocesan Office

[ ] Associate/Assistant Pastor [ ] Other

[ ] Parish Board

[ ] Yourself

Please specify

13. Are there other coordinators/directors of catechetical programs within the

parish you serve?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

14. If you answered yes to question 13, please indicate the positions they hold:

b. d. f.

15. How many hours per week are spent in preparing for and working with catechetical

programs under your coordination/direction?

hrs. per week.

62



16. Please indicate your educational
background:

(PLEASE ANSWER a) ,b) and c)

a) High school (date completed)

b) Col 1 ege (write none if none)

number of years

major of BA/BS
Major Degree(s)

c) Graduate work (write none if none)

degree(s) —

17 About how often do you attend the
following meetings?

(USING THE CODE BELOW, CHECK THE BRACKET THAT
INDICATES YOUR RESPONSE)

1 = Never 5 = Once every
two months

2 Once a week 6
= Once a semester

3 = Every two weeks 7
= Once a year

4 = Once a month

a) Diocesan meetings for directors

of religious education (DRE)

b) Inter diocesan/regional meetings

c) Inter parish meetings

[ ] 1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ]
4 [ ] 5 [ ] 6 [ ]

7

[]1[]2[]3[]4[]5[]6[]7
[ ] 1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ]

4 [ ] 5 [ ] 6 [ ]
7

18. To what extent do you read the following
journals/articles.

(PLEASE CIRCLE THE NUMBER WHICH APPROXIMATES
THE FREQUENCY OF TIME YOU

ALLOT THE FOLLOWING READING)

a) Religious education journals/articles

b) Theology journals/articles

c) Educational journals/articles

d) Other journals/articles that are

related to your role as DRE

(Specify)

NeverT
1

1

3 4

3 4

3 4

8

Very Often

9

123456789

19. Please rank the five most time consuming
tasks listed here that

you undertake as coordinator/directori

a) Planning curricula and programs

b) Planning budgets

c) Handling discipline problems

d) Teaching religion classes

e) Coordinating in-service teacher

training

f) Providing materials/equipment

g) Coordinating staff meetings

h) Doing secretarial work

1)

Evaluating individual teachers

j) Evaluating overall program

k) Counseling teachers

l) Coordinating adult education

m) Coordinating family education

n) Evaluating text books

o) Recruiting teachers

p) Other, specify

First in time consumption

Second in time consumption

Third in time consumption

Fourth in time consumption

Fifth in time consumption

63



20.

What percentage (%) of your racial background is:

a) Caucasian %

b) Black/Negro %

c) Hispanic %

e) Native American/Indian %

f) Oriental %

should total 100 %

21.

What educational experience have you had in the following areas

within the last two years ?

(USING THE CODE BELOW CHECK THE NUMBER THAT INDICATES YOUR ANSWER)

1 = No course work 3 = Undergraduate work

2 = Workshops/lectures 4 = Graduate work

a) Theology

b) Educational methodology

c) Administration

d) Guidance/counseling

e) Religious education

f) Other, specify

[ ] 1 ] 2 [ ] 3

[ ] 1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3

[ ] 1 ] 2 [ ] 3

[]

1

1 EHE]
3

3

[ ] 1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4

- II. THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS PERTAIN TO THE PROFILE OF THE PARISH

AND ITS CATECHETICAL PROGRAMS

22. How many priests are assigned to the parish(s) you serve?

23. How many families are in the parish(s) you serve?

24. What percentage of the parish you serve is:

a) Caucasian %

b) Black/Negro %

c) Spanish surnamed American %

d) Native American (Indian) %

e) Oriental %

should total 100 %

25.

Please estimate the percentage (%) of families which have incomes:

a) Below $4,000 %

b) Between $4,001-$8,000 %

c) Between $8,001 -$1 5,000 %

d) Between $1 5,001-$20,000 %

e) $20,001 + %

should total 100 %

26.

Please estimate the percentage of families in the parish that turn over

every three (3) years.

% of families

every three years.

64



27. Please indicate where the geographic location of the parish(s) you

serve is located.

a) [ ] Within a high major city, i.e., within a city or twin cities

where the population is over one million (1,000,000)

b) [ ] Within a major city, ie., within a city or twin cities where the

population is between a million and 50,000.

c) [ ] Within a major city suburb , i.e., with a suburb that is

functionally bound to a major city.

d) [ ] Within a small city , i.e., in a small city where the population is

under 50,000 but over 2,500.

e) [ ] Within a small town/rural area in which the population is 2,500

or under.

28. In questions 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27 how were the statistics derived?

[ ] Statistics from census

[ ] Estimated guess

[ ] Other means, please specify

29. About how often do the parish priest(s) offer the following services to

those persons involved in catechetics outside the Catholic School?

a) Help in adult education

b) Help in family education

c) Provide student liturgies

d) Teach regular religion classes

e) Visit religion classes

f) Participate in social activities

that relate to catechetical program

g) Help catechists in their task of

teaching

h) Help in planning of projects

that pertain to catechesis

Never—

r

Very Often

9

9

9

9

9

123456789
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

30. Please list and rank the four (4) most important services that the Diocesan Office

provides for the parish you serve. Rank in order of importance with No.l being most

important)

2 .

3.

4.

31. To what extent are the following adult learning programs offered by the parish?

(USING THE FOLLOWING CODE, CHECK THE NUMBER THAT INDICATES YOUR ANSWER)

1 = Never 4 = Once a month 7 = Once a year

2 Once a week 5 = Once every 2 months

3 = Once every two (2) weeks 6 = Once a semester

a) Discussion groups

b) Lecture series

c) Leadership skills development

d) Parish retreats/missions

e) Catechumenate and post

baptismal catechesis

f) Programs for senior

citizens

g) Prayer groups

h) Programs for singles

i) Other, Specify

[ ] 1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5 [ ] 6 [ ] 7

c ] 1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5 [ ] 6 [ ] 7

[ ] 1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5 [ ] 6 [ ] 7

[ ] 1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5 [ ] 6 [ ] 7

[ ] 1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5 [ ] 6 [ ] 7

[ ] 1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5 [ ] 6 [ ] 7

[ ] 1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5 [ ] 6 [ ] 7

[ ] 1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5 [ J 6
f

]
7

[ ] 1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ]
4 [ ] 5 [ J 6 [ J 7

65



32. To what extent are the following family education programs offered

(USE SAME CODE AS FOR QUESTION 31)

by the parish?

a) Parish marriage preparation

b) Parenthood education, e.g.,

early parenting, parent

effectiveness

c) Ministry to divorced/separated

d) Marriage and family enrichment

e) Natural family planning

f) Family living and sex

education

g) Other, specify

[ ] 1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5 [ ] 6 [ ] 7

[ ]

1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ]

1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ]

1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ]

1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ]

1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4

[ ] 5 [ ] 6 [: ] 7

[ ] 5 [ ] 6 [: ] 7

[ ] 5 [ ] 6 [: ] 7

[ ] 5 [ ] 6 [: ] 7

[ ] 5 [ ] 6 [ ] 7

[ ] 1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5 [ ] 6 [ ] 7

33. Approximately what percentage (%) of adult parishioners participate in adult education

each year?

%

34. Approximately what percentage (%) of parish families participate in family education

each year?

%

35.

Is there a Pre-school program of religion for children during the year?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

36.

Are there special education programs in your area (not necessarily catechesis)

for any of the following:

(USING THE FOLLOWING CODE, PLEASE CHECK THE NUMBER THAT INDICATES YOUR ANSWER)

1 = None exists 4 = Given by a private institution

2 = Given by the parish 5 = Given by another other than the parish,

3 = Given by a public institution public or private institution

a) Pre-school developmental ly delayed?

b) School age handicapped, slow learner,

or mentally handicapped?

c) Young adult to midlife (e.g. sheltered

workshops, recreational facilities,

group homes)?

d) Elderly handicapped (e.g. geratric

clinics, senior centers, meals on

wheels)?

[ ] 1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5

[ ] 1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5

[ ] 1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5

[ ] 1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5

37.

Does the parish provide special help in catechesis to children, adolescents and

adults who:

a) Are slow learners or mentally handicapped?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

b) Have learning disabilities?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

c) Are emotionally disturbed or are socially maladjusted

[ ] Yes [ ] No

d) Are blind or partially seeing

[ ] Yes [ ] No

e) Are deaf or hard of hearing

[ ] Yes [ ] No

66



38. Are handicapped parishioners provided for in any of the

following ways?

a) Adapted liturgies for handicapped children?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

b) Elimination of architectural barriers for those with physical handicaps?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

c) Provision of special aids for those with sensory handicaps

(e.g., hearing aids or interpreters for the deaf)?

[ J Yes [ ] No

39. In preparing children for the Eucharist are parents required to

participate in the preparation of their children?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

If yes, what percentage^) of parents actually participate?

%

40.

In preparing children for the sacrament of Reconciliation are parents

required to participate in the preparation of their children?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

If yes, what percentage^) of parents actually participate?

%

41.

In preparing young people for the sacrament of Confirmation is there a program

especially designed to involve the parents with the preparation?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

If yes, what percentage (%) actually participate?

%

N.B. QUESTIONS 42 TO 47 REFER ONLY TO THE ELEMENTARY LEVEL (GRADES 1-8)

Please estimate as close as possible the statistics requested in the boxes below.

42. No. of Average length Estimated no. of

children No. of of each children who

attending classes class Place where never attend

Gr. Level classes per yr. session classes held formal religion classes

Pre-School

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

67



43.

In estimating the number of children who never attend formal religion

classes how were these statistics derived?

[ ] Statistics from census

[ ] Estimated guess

[ ] Other means, please specify

44. Please give the number of:

a) Paid catechists on the elementary level

b) Volunteer catechists on the elementary level

c) Clerical staff

d) Librarians

45. Is there a certification program offered for catechists in your area?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

If yes, approximately what percentage(%) of catechists (Grs.1-8) are

a) Certified as catechists? %

b) Working for certification %

c) Have no certification and

are not working for it? %

46. Does the diocesan office require certification for catechists?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

47

.

(USING THE CODE BELOW PLEASE CHECK THE NUMBER THAT INDICATES YOUR ANSWER)

1 = Never 5 = Once every 2 months

2 = Once a week 6 = Once a semester

3 = Once every 2 weeks 7 = Once a year

4 = Once a month

a) About how often does the

teaching staff meet to

evaluate matters pertaining

to teaching? [ ]

b) ..are in-service training

courses held for teaching

staff? [ ]

c) ...do catechists and parents

meet to discuss student's

progress?
[ ]

d) ...are days of spiritual

renewal for students? [ ]

e) ...are days of spiritual

renewal for catechists? [ ]

f) ...are catechists provided

the opportunity to get

together just to socialize? [ ]

g) ...do students partake in

liturgies, e.g., lectors? [ ]

1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5 [ ] 6 [ ] 7

1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5 [ ] 6 [ ] 7

1 [ 1 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5 [ ] 6 [ ] 7

1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5 [ ] 6 [ ] 7

1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5 [ ] 6 [ ] 7

1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5 [ ] 6 [ ] 7

1 [ ] 2 [ ] 3 [ ] 4 [ ] 5 [ ] 6 [ ] 7

68



N.B. QUESTIONS 48-54 REFER ONLY TO THE SECONDARY LEVEL AND YOUTH MINISTRY

48. Which of the following services does the parish provide for youth?

a) Guidance counseling

Never—

r

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Very

frequently

b) Organized sports i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

c) Leadership training i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

d) Parish youth center i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

e) Camping opportunities i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

f) Job opportunities for

disadvantaged youth i 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

49. How often are youth involved

a) Parish council

in the fol

Never

1 2

lowing ministries?

3 4 5 6 7 8

Very

frequently

b) Catechists 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

c) Catechist aid 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

d) Community services, e.g.

helping shut-ins 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

e) Action for justice, e.g.

getting petitions for

better housing 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

f) Musicians for liturgy 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

g) Extraordinary ministers

for the Eucharist 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

h) Other, specify

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

50.

Please estimate as close as possible the statistics requested in the boxes below.

Number of Number of Number of youth

youth attending meetings Place where never attending

Gr. Level religion programs year meetings are held religion programs

9

10

11

12

51.

In estimating the number of youth who never attend formal religion

programs how were these statistics derived?

[ ] Statistics from census

[ ] Estimated guess

[ ] Other means, please specify

52.

Does your parish catechetical program have peer ministry? e.g., youth helping

youth in studies, drug problems, etc.

[ ] Yes [ ] No

53.

Are programs for youth catechesis evaluated by the parish rel igious education

coordinator/director?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

If yes, how frequently are the programs evaluated each year? x per year

69



54. (USING THE FOLLOWING CODE PLEASE CHECK THE NUMBER THAT INDICATES YOUR ANSWER)

1 = Never 5 = Once every 2 months

2 = Once a week 6 = Once a semester

3 = Once every two weeks 7 = Once a year

4 = Once a month

How frequently do youth have their own:

a) Eucharistic celebration

b) Para-liturgical celebration

c) Prayer service

d) Scripture study group

(Outside of formal class)

e) Penance service

f) Retreats

55. Is there a college/university in the area of the parish that provides courses in

religious education for catechists?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

56. Is there a parish library?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

If yes, how many volumes does it have

What percentage (%) of teachers use it?

57.

Is there a catechetical budget for the parish catechetical program(s)?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

If yes, how much of the total parish budget is alloted for parish catechetical

programs?

%

58.

How many of the following items are available to the catechist in the parish program?

a) Slide projector

b) Movie projector

c) Overhead projector

d) Tape recorder

e) Record player

f) Videotape machine

59.

Is there a Catholic School within the parish you serve?

[ ] Yes [ ] No

If yes, please describe your relation to it in terms of the types of services you

receive and the types of joint religion projects you mutually participate in.

(If none, please write none)

[ ] 1 [ ]

[ ] 1 [ ]

[ ] 1 [ ]

[ ] 1 [

ejie

[ ] 3 [ ] 4 |

[ ] 3 [ ] 4 |

[ ] 3 [ ] 4 |

[ ] 5 [ ] 6 [

[ ] 5 [ ] 6 [

[ ] 5 [ ] 6 [

[ ] 3 [ ] 4 |

E ! il

[ ] 5 [ ] 6

E]s :

] 7

] 7

] 7

] 7

] 7

] 7

60.

Please list the parish boards, councils, commissions, etc. that function in the parish

THANK YOU

70