Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!akgua!psuvax!psuvm%v6m
From: psuvm%v6m@psuvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: 
Message-ID: <530@psuvm.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 13-Mar-84 16:11:08 EST
Article-I.D.: psuvm.530
Posted: Tue Mar 13 16:11:08 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 14-Mar-84 20:37:52 EST
Lines: 86


This is going back a few weeks on what Jon S. Stumpf was mulling over.

There have been enormous problems with the content of Catholic Religious
Education over the past 20 years.  I.e. how Catholics teach their children how
to be Catholics. It sounds like Stumpf is my age or younger (35) so we probably
had the same kind of instruction in religion courses in Catholic high school.

Briefly: after Vatican II the Church was willing to examine itself critically
anf the conclusion of the Church Fathers was that it needed some changes...
NONE of which were to changes in dogma.  There was a massive change in liturgy
(rituals and symbols) but these were meant to make the Mass and the Sacraments
more meaningful. (I hate the term!!!).  For many Catholics the change in the
liturgy was so shocking that they lost much of their old respect for the Church
and in some cases, I assume, even their faith.

There was a large change in the emphasis of the teaching of religion in the
schools.  We got away from studying apologetics and Church history and
formal morality and studied some form of eclectic Scripture, morality
curriculum that was INTENDED to be more meaningful to adolescents in the
technical, fast-paced "modern" world.  At the time I thought that it was
refreshing and a welcome change from the Baltimore Catechism (which I still
have and refer to, by the way) but when I went off to a non-Catholic college
I found that I was un-prepared for the philosophical and theological and
religious contempt of some students and even faculty.

As I look back, I miss the old rigorous days of Catholic religious education.
In this Secular-Humanist Age rigorous apologetics is CRITICAL.  In those days
we sacrificed rigor for relavance.  This is much of the same complaints extent
today.  Read past issues of National Catholic Register or The newsletter from
the Fellowship of Catholic Scholars for more detail.  This is all out in the
open and above board. Please don't consider this another "horror story", I'm
SICK of those carping Catholics who missed the whole point of their faith and
ridicule the whole Church structure and its faithful.

Stumpf is NOT one the carpers nor am I a proper apologeticist.  Both of us
struggle in or for the faith.  We have a difficult religion to live in.  I
doubt that any priest or lay would deny it.  In spite of many individual
shortcomings the Church does try to do what is best for the Faithful even
under strenious times.

Which finally brings up the main point of this article:

 >This is what I though my religion classes were trying to get across.
   >>>have the follower become a person<<<< They were teaching more a religion
> of "self" than say "Catholicism" because we did examine some other religions.
<<
 The above is reasonbly close to what Jon wrote. I condensed a bit.

If this were the attitude and the doctrine of the 4 years of his religion
courses then they were in serious doctrinal error.  Remember these are courses
for 14 to 18 year olds who are just learning the techniques of higher learning.
Their sophistication is NOT very high on the average. Indeed the SECULAR course
offerings over the 4 years will bring about a higher level of sophistication
needed for college work but this takes time.  The RELIGIOUS course offerings
are intended to teach correct Catholic thought on MULTIPLE issues.

One can easily be caught up in the process of attaining intellectual
sophistication and training and miss the primary goals of education.  When one
makes a rigorous study of the faith one is confronted with complicated issues
and in some cases pure mystery, (the Trinity).  Without proper guidance from
authority and the proper disposition of the student a crise of faith can
quickly develop.

This is what I think happened to Jon.  MY opinion, and it is only that, is that
Jon received some questionable teaching at one point and was never able to
recover from it.

Catholicism is NOT a religion of SELF.  Catholicism's main aim is NOT that you
become a "person" or a "human-being".  You are one already and its aim is your
salvation that it is concerned with.  Catholicism is a religion of SACRIFICE.
Secular Humanism is a philosophy of self and is opposed by the Church because
of this. (among other things)

I hate to sound pedantic but one can study and agonize oneself into a lost
faith.  I hate to sound simplistic but eventually one must nurture the GIFT
of faith.

Jon signed his note >>>still thinking <<<.  It is more.    Having gone
through comparable pain in this matter I empathize with him and his pain.
However there is support for the person who struggles so within the Church.
All is not lost to us.


                      Vincent Marchionni
                      V6M@PSUVM.BITNET.