Prayer has been described by spiritual writers as the life of the soul. There is no Christian vitality possible without prayer. Yet a great deal of formalism has crept into the manner of our praying. Much of this is caused by the tendency on the part of teachers to confuse the teaching of prayer with the teaching of prayers.
The distinction which we must make between oral prayer and mental prayer tends to obscure the fact that all prayer has to be mental prayer. If mental prayer is expressed externally it becomes oral or vocal prayer. Prayer is defined as "an elevation of the mind and the heart to God." This elevation of mind and heart is absolutely essential to prayer. We may have a formula, we may have the moving of the lips, we may even have a pious attitude, but unless there is at least a minimum attempt to elevate the mind and heart to God, there is no prayer. The rest is only appearance, and may even be hypocrisy.
As a consequence, the teacher must be very careful not to confuse the teaching of prayer and the teaching of prayers. Prayers is a subject of the curriculum, like sacraments or Commandments. It is learned like Bible history or liturgy, or any thing else that is approached objectively. We teach children prayers; that is, certain set formulas which are recognized, established, and recommended by the Church for expressing the sentiments that every Christian should have toward God Jesus Christ Himself gave us such a formula when He presented us with the Lord's Prayer.
It is essential that children should know these formulas and understand as much as possible of their significance. Consequently the curriculum involves the teaching of these prayers. They must be learned by heart. They must be "drilled." But their actual learning is not in itself a prayer. The teacher must not confuse the children by intimating in any way that when they are reciting the Lord's Prayer or the Hail Mary as a class lesson, they are praying. They are not; they are reciting a lesson. They may be praying in the general sense of the term, as all our work is a prayer, but this is not specifically prayer.
The teaching of prayer formulas can be worked very nicely into the general teaching of religion. As we have already stated, a certain amount of correlation should be established. For example, we correlate the teaching of the Hail Mary with doctrines (e.g. the Incarnation, the Immaculate Conception), feasts (e.g. the Annunciation, Christmas, the Visitation), and Scripture readings (e.g. Matt. 1; Luke 1-2; John 1). This is to give background to the prayer and to explain its meaning.
Because some of our prayer formulas are very old, we have vocabulary difficulties with archaic words and phrases. For example, "Blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus"[1]; "Hallowed be thy name"; and "He descended into hell." The resourceful teacher must find means to make these expressions intelligible and interesting to the child. The expression "Hallowed be thy name," can be explained simply: "We want God to be loved. We want His name to be spoken in a holy way. This is what 'Hallowed' means – holy be thy name." In regard to the "hell" of the Apostles' Creed, the teacher will point out that this is not the place of the damned. "It is the place where all the good people who had died before Our Lord was born were waiting for Him to bring them home to heaven."
The prayers ought to be broken down into their proper parts and explained, whenever possible, in some narrative context. Thus, the first two parts of the Hail Mary can be explained in the context of the angel's conversation with Our Lady, and Elizabeth's greeting; the Lord's Prayer in association with the story of Our Lord's teaching on the mount.
As each part of the prayer is taught, it should be repeated several times, then joined to the previous part and repeated until the whole is learned. It may help the children to recite the prayer in its entirety reverently and slowly at the end of the lesson. However, when teaching a prayer, the lesson atmosphere must be maintained. We repeat that learning the prayer should not be confused in the minds of the children with actual praying. In fact, it might be better with some classes not to recite the prayer as a prayer after it has been taught, but to wait until another time, during the next lesson or in a study period. "Now let us see if we know the Our Father."
There can be no Christian life without prayer. Therefore it is most essential that a child learn to pray properly. Too many people, particularly lay people, are afraid of the term "mental prayer." Yet, as we have already stated, there can be no prayer without raising the mind to God. Thus, it is necessary to have the child make a beginning in the practice of mental prayer. While this is not a difficult practice, certain precautions must be taken to make it effective.
Every morning in every class there should be a period de voted to a brief mental prayer. It need not be long. St. La Salle recommends that one of the children, a prayer monitor, stand and say, "Let us remember that we are in the holy presence of God." A brief period of silence follows to give the class time to reflect. In the early grades a maximum of five minutes, in the beginning at least, might be devoted to teaching mental prayer.
The following procedure is suggested. The children are told to sit at their desks. The teacher proposes some pious thought and speaks to God, the Blessed Virgin, or the saints for the children. This can be done by commenting on some prayer with which they are already familiar, or on the feast of the day. At first the teacher will talk during most of the prayer period. As the students become accustomed to the practice of mental prayer, they may be left for some time to themselves. To avoid distraction, desks should be cleared and the children should close their eyes. Gradually this process can be developed into a very serious and profitable practice of mental prayer. A visit to the Blessed Sacrament provides an excellent atmosphere for teaching mental prayer. Often, drawing the children's attention to the crucifix in the classroom or having them place a holy picture on their desks can help them to speak intimately and lovingly with God in prayer.[2]
Children are realists. If prayer is talking to God, they will find it extremely difficult not to see or hear the Person to whom they are speaking. It is therefore sound procedure for the teacher to choose a few simple incidents in Christ's life – the marriage feast at Cana, the cure of the ten lepers, the cure of the man born blind, the cure of the paralytic – and tell the story in his own words. This telling might be accompanied by a part-by-part reading of the account from a children's edition of the New Testament. If good picture charts are available, they may profitably be introduced at this point. While reading or telling the story, the teacher should pause from time to time to help the children see Our Lord acting, listen as He speaks, imagine the expression on His face as He teaches, corrects, pleads, forgives, pities, grants a favor. This is the same Jesus who lives today, giving His undivided attention to the child who speaks to Him in prayer.
While the child should always be motivated to pray out of love and thanksgiving, by frequently recalling to him all the good things God has done for him, it is also proper to teach him the prayer of petition. After all, Our Lord placed great emphasis on this: "Ask, and it shall be given to you" (Matt. 7:7); "If you ask the Father anything in my name, he will give it to you" (John 16:23). It is hard for children, as for adults, to realize that God hears and answers every prayer, but sometimes the answer is "No." Therefore many examples should be given from the lives of the saints illustrating their disappointments as well as their joys in receiving what they asked of God. An illustration from the experience of the catechist is by no means out of place.
While mental prayer is indispensable to proper Christian formation, we cannot and should not neglect the use of vocal prayer. One of the best ways to use vocal or oral prayer is to have the children recite a prayer which has something to do with the mental prayer which they have just made. Thus, for example, after a mental prayer having to do with the feast of the Annunciation, the class might recite together, piously, the Hail Mary. This would show the intimate relation between mental and vocal prayer.
In any case, the period of vocal prayer in the classroom should not be prolonged. Children are incapable of focusing their attention over a long period on oral or vocal prayers More than that, the atmosphere of a classroom is not conducive to very long prayers. Better short and very good. The "time for prayer" ought to be indicated by certain procedures, such as the lighting of a candle beneath the crucifix or before a statue on the class altar. The teacher's own evident recollection and posture are of great importance. Children are usually more impressed by the teacher who reverently joins them in prayer than by instructions or directions as to gesture and posture from a teacher who walks up and down the room while they pray.
The recitation of prayers should under no consideration be a sort of contest to see who can shout the loudest. Children love to use their lungs. They will do it in a recitation of prayer if they are given the chance. There is nothing more disturbing to the thinking Catholic than to stop outside some of our schools in warm weather and hear, through an open window, the sing-song performance of prayer. Children are usually not thinking of God when they are sing-songing their prayers. It could easily be demonstrated that when they talk to their parents, friends, or teachers they do not talk in this fashion. Why then should they talk thus to God? They must be reminded, in season and out of season, that prayer is an elevation of the mind and the heart to God. It is conversation with God. They must talk to God, though with greater reverence than when they talk to anyone else. Vocal prayer said in unison can be reverent if the children are obliged to speak low and slowly. When this is done, a reverent attitude is provided.
There is considerable difficulty in having children say the rosary piously. In the lower grades it might be better to separate the saying of the rosary into the recitation of the five decades at different periods of the day. One decade at a time is enough for young children to cope with. A large picture of the scene depicted in the mystery may be placed where all can see it. However, difficulty in reciting the rosary with young children must not be interpreted as a reason for discouraging the recitation of the family rosary. On the contrary, this practice is to be strongly recommended. Its values are many; it teaches families to pray together, and it is a source of blessing on the home.
Once we have introduced the child to the notion of prayer as a conversation with God, we must lead him gradually to the Mass as the greatest prayer, the central act of Christian worship. It would seem that, in the very beginning, the best approach is by presenting the Mass as a story of love, the exchanging of gifts between us and God. The notion of sacrifice should be introduced as soon as possible, and always in keeping with the child's capacity to understand what is taught to him.
In the lower grades a systematic instruction on the Mass is needed. The sacrifices of the Old Testament, if taught at all, should be touched upon only briefly. It is the recommendation of experienced catechists that introductory instructions on the Mass be as uncomplicated as possible. Pictures of the parts of the Mass should be shown. Excellent film strips are available for this purpose.[3] In the beginning, the three principal parts of the Mass should be shown and explained.
The Offertory will be presented as an act of gift-giving and a sign of love. We offer bread and wine, but most of all we offer ourselves to God when the priest holds up the paten and chalice. The explanation might be: "God, who is our Father, loves us very much. When people love each other, they exchange gifts. On what feast of Our Lord do you exchange gifts with your loved ones – your parents, brothers, sisters, friends? On what other occasions do we exchange gifts? We all know that a gift is a sign of love. At every Mass we have a chance to give something to God. We can offer Him ourselves. This is what He wants more than any other gift in the world."
The Consecration, with its solemn preparation and the ringing of the bell, should be reverently presented. Perhaps the scene of the Last Supper can be shown prior to the priest's act of consecration. The children are told that, as Our Lord changed bread and wine into His body and blood at the Last Supper, the bread and wine are changed into His body and blood at the Consecration.
"The priest lifts Our Lord up above the altar. He is offering a Gift to God the Father. This is the perfect Gift – Christ Himself. Jesus offers Himself to the Father. We offer Jesus to the Father. We offer ourselves to the Father. When we give something to God to show that we love Him and want to obey Him, this is called a sacrifice. The Mass is a great act of love. It is a sacrifice."
Having approached the notion that we offer a sacrifice with Christ, who offers Himself for us, an opening is made for beginning our teaching on participation at Mass. An obvious difficulty arises – Latin. If prayer is a lifting up of the mind and heart to God, surely some obstacle is present when the child is taught to pray in words which he fails to understand. If the terminology of his own vernacular prayers must be explained to him, how much more carefully must the Latin responses be taught?
For the primary grades it would seem sufficient to have the children recite together at low Mass some prayers, or sing appropriate hymns in the vernacular, according to local custom, at those parts where such prayers and hymns are permitted In the intermediate and upper grades, the simple Latin responses of the server should be taught. In these grades, more detailed and systematic teaching of the Mass will help the children to realize the part that Christians are called upon to play in this tremendous act of worship.
The Latin responses should be carefully explained in English. We might begin by teaching only the simpler responses of the server; then progress to the Gloria, the Creed, the Sanctus-Benedictus, and the Agnus Dei; and finally the responses at the foot of the altar, the Suscipiat, and the Lord's Prayer. As soon as possible under local conditions, the children of the intermediate grades should be introduced to the Gregorian melodies for the Kyrie, Gloria, Credo, Prefatory responses, Sanctus-Benedictus, and Agnus Dei. It is to be hoped that gradually the younger children will learn these melodies from those in the advanced grades.
It might not be out of place in the seventh and eighth grades to train boys as commentators, or at least to prepare them to read at Mass the Epistle and Gospel in the vernacular. Of course, the enacting of the Instructions regarding participation at Mass is left to the discretion of the Ordinary of the diocese, and to pastors who apprise him of the situation in their particular locale. Well-trained catechists, however, will be invaluable to the bishops and pastors in helping them to realize in their jurisdiction the Instructions concerning lay participation at Mass. In fact in many places, groups of trained children are being asked to attend one of the parish Masses to act as a "core" about which adult participation is being formed.
The Church has always been loath to make official pronouncements concerning methodology or the means of religious instruction. It has always felt that, as long as orthodoxy is safeguarded and the spiritual good of its children procured, the faithful working in the field of religious instruction are capable of discovering the best ways of doing things. At times this may have militated against some much-needed reforms, but the principles have always been very clear. This is true in the teaching of catechetics as in many related fields. The popes have always laid down the general rules for the teaching of religion; these have been consistent in terms of making sure that the mind and heart of the child were really reached and inspired.
There is one fairly notable exception to this rule, and that has to do with little children and the reception of their first confession and first Holy Communion. Pope St. Pius X, while stating only in general terms the nature of catechetical instruction, issued a very clear and positive decree, Quam singulare, to make the world sure of the Church's position in regard to the age for the reception of the sacraments – in particular for confession and Holy Communion.
The whole spirit of the approach of Pius X to the early and frequent Communion of children is specifically that we are dealing with children, and therefore we are not to expect too much of them. Since Our Lord gave us the sacraments to help us, and since He has a special love for little children, He obviously expects children to approach the Holy Table. He could not, and we should not, expect the mind of a man in the frame of a seven year-old boy, or the comprehension of a woman in that of a seven year-old girl. The whole burden of the pope's message is that we must expect children to approach this great sacrament specifically as children, knowing and loving in their own way. The decree itself is very clear. "Therefore the age of discretion for confession is the time when one can distinguish between right and wrong, that is, when one arrives at a certain use of reason, and so, similarly the age required for Holy Communion is when one can distinguish between the Bread of the Holy Eucharist and ordinary bread -- again, the age at which a child attains the use of reason."
In regard to the knowledge and preparation required for children who are to be brought to these holy sacraments, the Holy Father is equally tolerant. "A full and perfect knowledge of Christian doctrine is not necessary either for first confession or for first Communion." Afterward, however, the child will be obliged to learn gradually the entire catechism according to his ability. "The knowledge of religion which is required of a child in order to be properly prepared to receive first Communion is such that he will understand according to his capacity those mysteries of faith which are necessary as a means of salvation, and that he can distinguish the Bread of the Eucharist and ordinary common material bread, and definitely receive Holy Communion with devotion becoming his years."
The pope does not require a devotion beyond the child's years; he does not require knowledge beyond his years. But some teachers are more intransigent. They imagine that the reception of these sacraments, since it is in a certain sense the entry into the full Christian life, requires also full Christian knowledge. Thus they open a campaign of drill and forced catechetical growth that is not only frustrating but at times positively dangerous. Cases have been known in which, for weeks on end, the only subject taught (or practically the only one) was catechism, in order that the children might prepare properly for their first Communion. Surely this is not the mind of the Pontiff as to what is proper for preparing children for Holy Communion.
It would be an exaggeration to say that children in the first and second grades, or in whatever class the first Communion takes place, should be taught exclusively those truths that they would naturally receive at such an age. It has already been established in Church teaching, and recently reaffirmed by the Holy See, that the Progressive school is in error when it tries to maintain that certain doctrines are too difficult for children and should not be taught. We are not speaking here of a question of adaptation; we are speaking of the real suppression of certain basic doctrines. This has been condemned. Some have maintained also that the ordinary religious knowledge of the child is sufficient for Holy Communion. This is a similar exaggeration. There is no doubt that a certain concentration on the meaning of the sacraments and a necessary attention to the techniques of receiving them is very much in order.
As to the matter of reception of the sacrament of penance, the child must, in the words of the pope, "know the difference between right and wrong." This basic knowledge which is part of the ability to reason must be sharpened into a clear perception of the sense of sin. This sense of sin is a delicate thing, and must be handled with utmost care, particularly in the very young. They have it intuitively and it must be applied to the precepts of Christian morality. Once we appreciate that a basic understanding of what is right and wrong is present in the child's consciousness, we can relax. All "lists" of sins and offenses, all introduction of particular examens and so forth, should be dutifully avoided for children at this age. The teacher should be able to point out the basic areas in which a child is likely to sin and, if necessary, leave the rest to God and the Holy Spirit. The child's own conscience will be, even at this age, his best guide.
The upper grades will provide ample opportunity for further instruction on the sacrament of penance.[4] A definition of contrition is superfluous for children going to confession for the first time. Simple explanation of the fact that sin takes us away from God, and hurts God who has been so good to us, is basic. Contrition out of love for God is, of course, to be striven after by all Christians. This should be developed in the child by as many means as are prudent.
Words should be chosen carefully to avoid certain verbal images that hardly reflect true doctrine. For instance, every child knows that through the merits gained by Christ's death on the cross, our sins are forgiven and we are restored to friendship with God. Often this truth is obscured by stressing the dignity of Christ as Son of God, so that the picture of the merciful Mediator is forgotten. This is a most important point when we teach the children about forgiveness of sin. Truly, the cross shows clearly the ingratitude of sin. But it must also shine forth as the joyous symbol of our salvation.
It is poor to insist on saying to children that our sins caused Christ's sufferings and to tell them that every sin they commit drives the nails deeper into Christ's hands. Sin is the cause of Christ's sufferings in so far as atonement for sin was the purpose of His sufferings and death. But our sins are not the real cause of His sufferings, and it is questionable pedagogy to depict the children scourging Christ or nailing Him to the cross. Inciting children to tears and welling emotions by detailed and heart-rending descriptions of sin tormenting the dying Savior is often fruitless. Emotion is neither understanding nor conviction. What one gains in effect, he loses in a clear picture of the mystery of salvation which should be a joyous hope and love rather than an incitement to feeling.
Many various means of expressing sorrow have been proposed for children. The formula for an act of contrition in the First Communion Catechism is adequate for the child's understanding. Father Aloysius Heeg's treatment of the subject of contrition is especially good.[5]
We must teach the child to do the necessary things to make a confession. Using the fingers of one hand, the child can be taught: (1) to find out within his heart what are his sins,"[6] (2) to be sorry for offending God; (3) to tell these sins to the priest; (4) to say the prayers the priest gives him to say, showing God how sorry he is; and (5) to try hard not to sin again. It is also very laudable, in preparing the child for confession, to make him familiar with the church and the interior of the confessional. In this manner, any exaggerated fear of the darkness and solitude of the confessional will be eliminated. Surely it is unnecessary to speak of the kindness with which he must be received by the priest on this, his first conscious adventure into the sacramental mercy of Our Lord.
A certain specific teaching must also take place in regard to the sacrament of Holy Eucharist. The child's developing understanding will soon allow him to distinguish between this Eucharistic Food and ordinary bread, and thus the basic requirement of the Holy Father is accomplished. The other doctrines must not be neglected; the ideas of creation out of love and Our Lord's Redemption are accompanying doctrines without which the Eucharist would be incomprehensible. As for the sacrament itself, the aspects which should be most explored are those of Our Lord's love for us, this fruit of His Redemption, and His desire to live so close to us that He is willing to come to live within us. The emphasis therefore should be on the spirit of union between the communicant and his Lord.
As to the actual reception of the Eucharist, there is not a great deal required in having a child put out his tongue to receive the Eucharist wafer. It is true that in many places this is a ceremony which receives a great deal of attention from parents and teachers alike, and so it should remain. Frequently the wafer clings to the child's tongue or palate, and his first experience with Holy Communion verges on panic. He knows he must not touch the host. What can he do? Is it wrong for him to hold the host in his mouth a long time if he cannot swallow it?
Experienced catechists offer various solutions. Some recommend having the children practice with unconsecrated hosts during their preparation. The child must learn, in fact, to distinguish ordinary bread, such as the unconsecrated host, from the Holy Eucharist into which this bread is changed by the priest. Others criticize this practice as psychologically unsuitable, possibly damaging to the child's reverence for the Blessed Sacrament. Often the catechist must decide for himself how to handle this matter, taking into account the particular children he is teaching and the kind of cooperation that is being given at home in helping to prepare the children for Communion. In other cases, the pastor may give instructions in this regard.
Further preparations for first Communion demand considerable restraint and common sense. The externals of the reception of Holy Communion are important, but they can be overdone. Many bishops have issued decrees against the exaggerations in dress which have taken place on these occasions. Also, it might be well for the teachers to examine their consciences about exaggeration in the form of "martial law" under which children sometimes have to approach the sacrament of love.
We might sum up by saying that the most important element in preparation for first confession and Holy Communion is that the child come to these sacraments in a spirit of appreciation of the great gifts of Our Lord to us. He should consider the formal preparation as part of his normal course in religious training, and not something very much apart and specialized.
Everything about the child's first Communion should be as agreeable as possible. The pastor's examination, for example, should be considered a pleasant meeting between the spiritual Father and his children. It ought to provide an opportunity for the children to show how eagerly they have prepared to receive Our Lord, and how much they have learned, both as to the nature of their actions and the technique of accomplishing them. The desire of the catechist to have the children shine when Father comes to examine them for their first Communion is a laudable one, but care should be taken to avoid creating a veritable ogre out of both Father and the examination.
The class in catechetics which prepares for these events should be among the most pleasant in the child's experience. There is an immediate objective to be reached. Children love immediate objectives and they can be spurred on to better efforts of mind and heart with this in view, than when the objectives are necessarily more remote. Whether perfect recitation of the catechism, particularly the part having to do with confession and Communion, a highly disciplined performance in the confessional and at the altar, are laudable objectives is a matter of opinion, but they should always be secondary to the meeting between Our Lord and His child.
From a practical point of view, the question of examinations in the subject of religion is probably the greatest single difficulty besetting both the classroom teacher and the administrator (at all levels) who wish to improve the teaching of religion. At every lecture or conference concerning the teaching of religion, some member of the audience is likely to comment, during the question period, "This is all very well, but the type of examination which we have in our school (or in our diocese or in our system) makes it impossible for us to teach this way. All we can do is to teach the children the questions and answers by heart, because that is what is expected of them when the examiner comes around, or when the examination is sent.
There is no doubt that, in many cases, teachers have become aware of the need for a change in the approach to the teaching of religion, long before their superiors or supervisors. This is particularly true when the superiors involved are not professional educators and have not had the opportunity to read up on developments in the catechetical Geld. When the examination of the class in religion is placed in the hands of these persons, however competent they may be in other fields, they are apt to fall back on the old system, and question according to the catechism. They will, of course, expect the answers contained in the catechism.
Or perhaps the religion examination is conducted orally and again, the examiner relies solely upon the question as phrased in the catechism and expects only the catechism response. This need not be an insurmountable obstacle. But it is undoubtedly true that it is discouraging to the good teacher who tries to teach more than words, and would like the results to show. It also means that, human nature being what it is, the teacher will have an almost overwhelming temptation to spend more time than necessary on the drilling of the catechism responses.
More important than the type of examination in religion is the teacher's understanding that the examination in religion cannot and must not be the sole criterion of the success of his or her teaching. Examinations always have to do with outcomes. They are tests. The very word indicates that they are supposed to examine results. Therefore, the first question which we must ask ourselves is whether the class in religion can be tested. The answer to that is "Yes, and no." The results can be tested, but this can only be done by God. The anal test, and in the last analysis the only essential one, is that which God will apply to the soul of the pupil when he comes before Him in the particular judgment.
The class in religion is not exclusively academic. The aim to understand, as we have seen, is absolutely necessary from a psychological and pedagogical point of view. But considering the matter in terms of the religious life of the child or the adult, the practice of religion is the most important objective of religious education, and the effect of the religion class upon the soul of the child is obviously beyond the scope of testing. We must be convinced that the class in religion cannot be tested in all its aspects. This is the most important of all the truths about the examination in religion. Once it is understood by everyone, we will have a much better chance of succeeding in the teaching of religion. The teacher who, in trying to produce in his students a profound and living faith, slips up a little in some academic matter, will have the realization that all is not necessarily lost. Moreover, the teacher will realize that no matter what the nature of the examination in religion, whether it is "good" or "bad" in terms of truly testing the understanding of the children, it is not expected to reach down – into the very marrow of the question.
Recently we have had the privilege of observing several bishops on several different occasions examining children as a preliminary to the administration of the sacrament of confirmation. Although the bishops in question can have had little time to devote to the study of catechetical method, they practiced it perfectly. In discussion with them after the ceremony, they said the same thing: "I make it a point never to ask the question as phrased in the catechism."
To illustrate, let us see how one of these bishops proceeded in his questioning. He wished to elicit information concerning sacred mysteries. Keeping in mind that he was dealing with a group of children between the ages of seven and eleven, we will recognize that this is no small task. He could have begun by asking, "What is a mystery?" If this had been his previous technique the children would have been very well schooled in the reply, because knowledge of what the bishop asks spreads with greater rapidity than information in the native jungle.
Instead of that, His Excellency proceeded as follows. He had been questioning about the Blessed Trinity. When he concluded that part of his investigation, he asked a child, "Do you understand this (the Blessed Trinity)?" The child hesitated for a moment and responded, "No." Question: "Do you think anyone in your class understands it?" Answer: "No." Question: "Do you think your teacher understands it?" A little hesitation, and then the answer: "No." Question: "Do you think I understand it?" This time the hesitation was much more prolonged and a certain amount of embarrassment crept in, but the child gathered up all his confidence and answered, without proper protocol, if you will, but with staunch and unflinching courage, "No, sir."
From further questioning the bishop established the fact that God understands it, and God alone understands it. Finally, after a long series of questions, he arrived at the idea that a mystery is a truth revealed by God to us, which is above our ability to understand, but which we yet believe because God has told us about it.
The experts would label this approach inductive or Socratic. The bishop would be only moderately interested in the terminology. What he was interested in was ending out whether or not the children really understood the nature of God's communication to us, and the conditions which are set upon it and which are the framework of the faith.
As a by-product, which he may have realized a little less, he was establishing a pattern of teaching in the classroom which will endure long after his visit. The teachers in this diocese will be teaching the children to understand something about their holy religion, for the news will be carried to all the other parishes that are awaiting the bishop's visit. The whole attitude of the diocese toward the teaching of religion might well be modified by the single fact of the nature of the bishop's examination.
It has been suggested that we might best eliminate all examinations in religion. This, in our view, would be an error. It might be well as a sort of moratorium on slavishly verbal examinations, but it would be apt to give the general impression that religion is not a subject of very much importance since it is not sanctioned by an examination. This may be an unfortunate and limited point of view, but it exists and should not be encouraged. Again, we have to face human nature, and where there is no examination, there is sometimes very little teaching.
No, the answer does not lie in the suppression of examinations. It lies in understanding the nature of the examinations. We can examine only the student's comprehension, his understanding, of the truths which have been given to him. It is quite obvious, for instance, that there can be no examination of mental prayer. There can be no examination of the true understanding of the liturgy. There can be no examination of the practice of the virtues. Truly, the least important part of the teaching of religion is what is open to examination.
As for this partial examination on the intellectual side of the catechetical teaching, there is no reason why it cannot be done intelligently. A certain amount of objective testing, a reasonable amount of the terminology of the catechism, the use of practical applications and illustrations, opinion questions on quotations, all of these are techniques which will search out whether or not the children have understood the lesson. They will also lead the teacher to conduct the lesson along the same lines.
In some places, particularly in high school, the open-book technique has been used to avoid rote learning. This consists simply in allowing the children to use their textbooks in the examination. Some teachers and pupils rejoiced at the introduction of this system. They soon came to realize that if properly done, the examination, far from being easier, was much more difficult. It was also much more rewarding.
Such testing can prove effective only on condition that the examination questions are very carefully framed, so that the pupils cannot simply open a book and copy out an answer. Since it would be a travesty to set questions that could be answered by repeating the words from the book, the examiner is obliged to set much more penetrating questions. The material is in the book, but a great deal more understanding must be applied by the pupil before the necessary adjustment and adaptation to the answer can be made.
In any case, the fact remains that the teacher should be convinced of one thing. He is teaching for life and for eternity, not for examinations. His reward will not come in the form of prizes or recognition from the bishop or the Board of Education, or superintendents. It will come from God.
ENDNOTES:
[1] "Her cousin had found out that Mary had been chosen to be the Mother of Jesus, our Savior, and so she said to her, 'And blessed is the fruit of thy womb Jesus.' Yes, Mary was the most blessed among women, and her Son was the most blessed among all men. Mary is the Mother of Jesus, and Jesus is holy, most holy – Jesus is God. That is what these words mean: that both Mary the Mother and Jesus the Son are holy and blessed." Sr. Maria de la Cruz, H.H.S., and Sr. Mary Richard, H.H.S., Teacher's Guide, Grade 1, With Christ to the Father (New York: Sadlier, 1957), p. 57.
[2] A question exists as to whether pictures help children to pray better. Certainly, as we have pointed out, the quality of some religious art leaves much to be desired. Many religious educators favor allowing children, with their own peculiar perspective, to draw or represent holy persons for themselves. Others encourage the use of posters in the classroom to help the children to pray. mission poster, for example, moves the teacher to say (indicating the poster), "Let us say the Hail Mary today for all the priests, Brothers, and Sisters in the missions." A Mother's Day poster, a Catholic Charities poster, the picture of a hungry child – all suggest motives for prayer. Some understanding of the Mystical Body can surely begin here with the proper use of posters in prayer.
[3] "The use of sound filmstrips is not recommended for the first grade.... First-graders can learn much from still pictures. They love to point out things in a picture and tell its story.... Motion pictures or sound filmstrips demand too much effort for six-year-olds." Srs. de la Cruz and Richard, op. cit., p. 5.
[4] "Certainly, mortal sin must be treated in the upper grades, both frequently and with all due earnestness. But it should only be done in such a way that the terrible and unnatural character of such conduct is realized, otherwise the impression may be created that mortal sins are not to be taken too seriously, or looked upon as unavoidable, or – and this is or was frequently the case – children are encouraged to search their consciences for mortal sins which they have never committed. This results in confusing their consciences and create states of anxiety due to supposedly invalid confessions, sometimes with disastrous results." Jungmann, Handing on the Faith, p. 315.
[5] The Illustrated Catechism (St. Louis: Queen's Work, 1958), pp. 100-104.
[6] "It is, therefore, only necessary that, apart from the knowledge of the basic truths of religion which they must know for first Communion, they should be able to recognize certain of the faults which they commit as sins, to detest them before God and to confess them to the priest. No instruction on the Ten Commandments, on the distinction between grave and venial sin, on perfect and imperfect contrition, on the necessity and duty of confession, is required. It is enough to point to some of the ordinary sins of children. More important than detailed knowledge in the sense of the catechism is the knowledge that God is displeased with lying, disobedience, and stubbornness, and that we should humbly ask His pardon. To this we might add a simple explanation of how we should ask God's forgiveness, that is, how to awaken sorrow, and how to tell about one's sins." Jungmann, Handing on the Faith, p. 305.